3 ms·

I think you misinterpreted what he was suggesting - it is meaningless to say that Hillary won the popular vote because neither party were trying to win the popu

I think you misinterpreted what he was suggesting - it is meaningless to say that Hillary won the popular vote because neither party were trying to win the popular vote - you win the presidency by winning the electoral college. If instead the president was chosen by popular vote, both parties likely would have campaigned differently.

gruez 6y ago
>I think you misinterpreted what he was suggesting - it is meaningless to say that Hillary won the popular vote because neither party were trying to win the popular vote - you win the presidency by winning the electoral college. This is a non-sequitur. Whether or not that metric (popular vote) has a bearing on the results of presidential election is irrelevant to the statement of whether he won in that metric. Furthermore, it's counter-productive to the discussion to preface a comment with a politically charged comment (trump and some of his supporters legitimately believes he got more popular vote than clinton, despite evidence to the contrary), then backpedal on that statement by adding a bunch of qualifiers.
- LanceH 6y ago
  You don't win a metric.
  - gruez 6y ago
    Maybe with a definition that you can only "win" a competition that was agreed upon ahead of time. However, a quick search on hn shows that "win" colloquially also can mean beating everyone else at some metric (or in some cases, on a subjective basis). eg. "Chrome won" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14420972 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14420972, despite the lack of an actual competition for internet browser market share "Linux and open source have won, get over it" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23673867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23673867 "Teenage Engineering has won over kids and professionals with a synthesizer" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20527069 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20527069

gruez 6y ago

>I think you misinterpreted what he was suggesting - it is meaningless to say that Hillary won the popular vote because neither party were trying to win the popular vote - you win the presidency by winning the electoral college. This is a non-sequitur. Whether or not that metric (popular vote) has a bearing on the results of presidential election is irrelevant to the statement of whether he won in that metric. Furthermore, it's counter-productive to the discussion to preface a comment with a politically charged comment (trump and some of his supporters legitimately believes he got more popular vote than clinton, despite evidence to the contrary), then backpedal on that statement by adding a bunch of qualifiers.

LanceH 6y ago
You don't win a metric.
- gruez 6y ago
  Maybe with a definition that you can only "win" a competition that was agreed upon ahead of time. However, a quick search on hn shows that "win" colloquially also can mean beating everyone else at some metric (or in some cases, on a subjective basis). eg. "Chrome won" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14420972 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14420972, despite the lack of an actual competition for internet browser market share "Linux and open source have won, get over it" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23673867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23673867 "Teenage Engineering has won over kids and professionals with a synthesizer" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20527069 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20527069