4 ms·

This is equivalent to people who argue "President X didn't REALLY win because they didn't win the popular vote" Such an argument ignores the fact that presiden

by drcode 4y ago

This is equivalent to people who argue "President X didn't REALLY win because they didn't win the popular vote" Such an argument ignores the fact that president X would likely have changed their strategy if the determinant for winning the election was changed to winning the popular vote

willis936 4y ago
I'm not sure this makes sense since X is a populist.
- gruez 4y ago
  Except according to wikipedia "populist" doesn't refer to "popular vote", it refers to the idea of "the people vs the elites". >Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of the people and often juxtapose this group against the elite.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
DangitBobby 4y ago
What you're saying might be true (I'd take a bet against Rs suddenly winning the popular vote if the game changed, though) but it could also true that we're playing the wrong game.
- drcode 4y ago
  Oh don't get me wrong, the system we've settled on isn't great