> But they did appeal to enough of the electorate. Clinton received ~3% more votes, which was in line with the polling data. No, they didn't. The right and co

> But they did appeal to enough of the electorate. Clinton received ~3% more votes, which was in line with the polling data. No, they didn't. The right and correct way to count votes isn't the method that would've given your side a victory; it's the way that was prescribed by the law as it existed at the time of the election. > Unfortunately, because we have a system that makes certain Midwest and rust belt votes worth 3-10x more This is the the result of a very old compromise. Maybe it should be reevaluated, but that's a separate issue. I agree with the rest of your post.