4 ms·

The difference between this and Brexit is that more people voted for Brexit than against it, while more people voted for Hillary than for Trump.

matt_wulfeck 10y ago
Trump won the popular vote as well as the EV (at the time of this comment).
- fsck--off 10y ago
  Clinton is projected to win the popular vote once all the ballots (especially those in California) are counted.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - matt_wulfeck 10y ago
    Many things have been projected this election cycle.
    - vecter 10y ago
      That's ... not a valid argument against a different point. It's 1:41 AM on the west coast and despite the NY Times clearly calling the election for Trump, Clinton still has a forecasted 1% lead in the popular vote. Given California is incredibly blue, this will most likely hold true.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
- hedonistbot 10y ago
  Yes, I believe that the NYT are projecting the final outcome of the popular vote based on all those West Coast votes that are still being counted.
patrickg_zill 10y ago
The Electoral College exists for a reason, you know. BTW the estimated popular vote is between 0.7 and 1.3% in Hillary's favor at this point , according to NYT http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president . Not really a big difference.
- mikeyouse 10y ago
  Over a million voters isn't a big difference? 2/5 last elections won by the loser of the popular vote seems extremely problematic. Phrased differently, Democrats have won the popular vote in 4/5 of the most recent elections but only won office in two of them. In the 21st century, winning the most votes for president only results in a 50% success rate for Democratic presidential candidates.
  - patrickg_zill 10y ago
    Read up on why the EC exists. I think the term that applies is "concurrent majority". If you want a counter-example, you can look at small town and rural upstate NY and realize how their concerns are always neglected because the sheer number of NYC voters drowns out any chance they have to be heard as part of the electorate.
    - mikeyouse 10y ago
      It's a shame we don't have some sort of national representation determined by the popular vote that's independent of state size or economic power...
    - int_19h 10y ago
      EC exists because the states had to agree on a mutually acceptable compromise (between large and small states, and also between slave and non-slave states) when forming US. It doesn't make it inherently valuable - it was a compromise solution, which pretty much by definition means that it's not a perfect design.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

matt_wulfeck 10y ago

Trump won the popular vote as well as the EV (at the time of this comment).

fsck--off 10y ago
Clinton is projected to win the popular vote once all the ballots (especially those in California) are counted.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- matt_wulfeck 10y ago
  Many things have been projected this election cycle.
  - vecter 10y ago
    That's ... not a valid argument against a different point. It's 1:41 AM on the west coast and despite the NY Times clearly calling the election for Trump, Clinton still has a forecasted 1% lead in the popular vote. Given California is incredibly blue, this will most likely hold true.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
hedonistbot 10y ago
Yes, I believe that the NYT are projecting the final outcome of the popular vote based on all those West Coast votes that are still being counted.

patrickg_zill 10y ago

The Electoral College exists for a reason, you know. BTW the estimated popular vote is between 0.7 and 1.3% in Hillary's favor at this point , according to NYT http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president . Not really a big difference.

mikeyouse 10y ago
Over a million voters isn't a big difference? 2/5 last elections won by the loser of the popular vote seems extremely problematic. Phrased differently, Democrats have won the popular vote in 4/5 of the most recent elections but only won office in two of them. In the 21st century, winning the most votes for president only results in a 50% success rate for Democratic presidential candidates.
- patrickg_zill 10y ago
  Read up on why the EC exists. I think the term that applies is "concurrent majority". If you want a counter-example, you can look at small town and rural upstate NY and realize how their concerns are always neglected because the sheer number of NYC voters drowns out any chance they have to be heard as part of the electorate.
  - mikeyouse 10y ago
    It's a shame we don't have some sort of national representation determined by the popular vote that's independent of state size or economic power...
  - int_19h 10y ago
    EC exists because the states had to agree on a mutually acceptable compromise (between large and small states, and also between slave and non-slave states) when forming US. It doesn't make it inherently valuable - it was a compromise solution, which pretty much by definition means that it's not a perfect design.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]