It's Official: Clinton's Popular Vote Win Came Entirely From California

[Vigilante]

Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Wait, what?


Oh SHIT!!!!Trump won the Popular vote final tally, TOO!!!

Tonto, how did your polls work out...srill ravong about 538?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Wait, what?


Oh SHIT!!!!Trump won the Popular vote final tally, TOO!!!

Tonto, how did your polls work out...srill ravong about 538?

The national polls were within 2 points of Clinton's margin of winning the popular vote.

The worst poll was that one from the LA Times that you kept posting lolol.

 

[bodecea]

The last time I checked California was part of the United states.

It is...tho the Drumpfsters are jealous of it.

 

[Vigilante]

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 —


(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

No, idiot. California wasn't the only states where Hillary margin of victory was larger than Obama's. See Massachusetts.
By the way, you don't even know what "margin of victory" means.

Asshole apparently you cant stay with a topic, without Kalipornia, Trump wins the popular vote by almost 2 mollion

 

[NYcarbineer]

It doesn't. Under the electoral college, the North Dakota vote counts more.

Liberal math: 3>55.

In North Dakota, Trump got 1 electoral vote for every 73,000 votes he received.

In California, Clinton got 1 electoral vote for every 159,160 votes she received.

IOW, a N Dakota electoral vote is worth more than double a California electoral vote.

A minuscule difference in the state's popular vote can deliver 55 EC votes in California but only 3 in ND.

North Dakota has less than 800,000 PEOPLE you retard.

 

[danielpalos]

Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Meanwhile, if you look at every other measure, Trump was the clear and decisive winner in this election.

Only if we consider our red States and their non, democrat voting habits.

 

[Vigilante]

Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Wait, what?


Oh SHIT!!!!Trump won the Popular vote final tally, TOO!!!

Tonto, how did your polls work out...srill ravong about 538?

The national polls were within 2 points of Clinton's margin of winning the popular vote.

The worst poll was that one from the LA Times that you kept posting lolol.

Yes, loser, the polls were wrong, butt hurt...lolol

 

[NYcarbineer]

The last time I checked California was part of the United states.

It is...tho the Drumpfsters are jealous of it.

The Trumptards are so embarrassed about Trump losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton, whom they had said would be demolished by Trump,

that now they're cracking open every can of crackpot theories and rationalizations to claim that it didn't really happen.

"Eliminate California and Trump won the popular vote!"

Eliminate conservatives and the IQ of this country goes up 50 points.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Wait, what?


Oh SHIT!!!!Trump won the Popular vote final tally, TOO!!!

Tonto, how did your polls work out...srill ravong about 538?

The national polls were within 2 points of Clinton's margin of winning the popular vote.

The worst poll was that one from the LA Times that you kept posting lolol.

Yes, loser, the polls were wrong, butt hurt...lolol

No the national polls were right.

 

[Vigilante]

Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Meanwhile, if you look at every other measure, Trump was the clear and decisive winner in this election.

Only if we consider our red States and their non, democrat voting habits.

Thank GOD, they understand democracy

 

[Vigilante]

Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Wait, what?


Oh SHIT!!!!Trump won the Popular vote final tally, TOO!!!

Tonto, how did your polls work out...srill ravong about 538?

The national polls were within 2 points of Clinton's margin of winning the popular vote.

The worst poll was that one from the LA Times that you kept posting lolol.

Yes, loser, the polls were wrong, butt hurt...lolol

No the national polls were right.

So your saying Trump won the polls! Thanks for your input ...lol

 

[NYcarbineer]

It doesn't. Under the electoral college, the North Dakota vote counts more.

Liberal math: 3>55.

In North Dakota, Trump got 1 electoral vote for every 73,000 votes he received.

In California, Clinton got 1 electoral vote for every 159,160 votes she received.

IOW, a N Dakota electoral vote is worth more than double a California electoral vote.

A minuscule difference in the state's popular vote can deliver 55 EC votes in California but only 3 in ND.

A miniscule 100,000 vote difference delivered Trump 46 electoral votes in MI, WI, and PA.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wait, what?


Oh SHIT!!!!Trump won the Popular vote final tally, TOO!!!

Tonto, how did your polls work out...srill ravong about 538?

The national polls were within 2 points of Clinton's margin of winning the popular vote.

The worst poll was that one from the LA Times that you kept posting lolol.

Yes, loser, the polls were wrong, butt hurt...lolol

No the national polls were right.

So your saying Trump won the polls! Thanks for your input ...lol

Trump lost the popular vote by 2+ percentage points and the polls said he lose by about 4.

That makes the polls right.

 

[Vigilante]

It doesn't. Under the electoral college, the North Dakota vote counts more.

Liberal math: 3>55.

In North Dakota, Trump got 1 electoral vote for every 73,000 votes he received.

In California, Clinton got 1 electoral vote for every 159,160 votes she received.

IOW, a N Dakota electoral vote is worth more than double a California electoral vote.

A minuscule difference in the state's popular vote can deliver 55 EC votes in California but only 3 in ND.

A miniscule 100,000 vote difference delivered Trump 46 electoral votes in MI, WI, and PA.

GOD works in small ways!....lololol

 

[Vigilante]

Tonto, how did your polls work out...srill ravong about 538?

The national polls were within 2 points of Clinton's margin of winning the popular vote.

The worst poll was that one from the LA Times that you kept posting lolol.

Yes, loser, the polls were wrong, butt hurt...lolol

No the national polls were right.

So your saying Trump won the polls! Thanks for your input ...lol

Trump lost the popular vote by 2+ percentage points and the polls said he lose by about 4.

That makes the polls right.

No, makes them inaccurate, but 538 has the EV all wrong, which you used to promote!

 

[Rexx Taylor]

California: Land Of The Stupid. All votes for Hillary should be deducted!!!

 

[Slade3200]

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 —


(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

No, idiot. California wasn't the only states where Hillary margin of victory was larger than Obama's. See Massachusetts.
By the way, you don't even know what "margin of victory" means.

Asshole apparently you cant stay with a topic, without Kalipornia, Trump wins the popular vote by almost 2 mollion

Without one of the biggest, most populated, largest economic producing state? Haha, what a dumb comment. So I guess I could say, without Texas Clinton would have dominated the popular vote by millions more and won the election... but who gives a fuck... nobody

 

[Vigilante]

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 —


(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

No, idiot. California wasn't the only states where Hillary margin of victory was larger than Obama's. See Massachusetts.
By the way, you don't even know what "margin of victory" means.

Asshole apparently you cant stay with a topic, without Kalipornia, Trump wins the popular vote by almost 2 mollion

Without one of the biggest, most populated, largest economic producing state? Haha, what a dumb comment. So I guess I could say, without Texas Clinton would have dominated the popular vote by millions more and won the election... but who gives a fuck... nobody

You mean the Socialist Republic of N. Mexico....Please leave the Union,!

But you lost, that's the fun part!

 

[boedicca]

Given Motor Voter, much of Clinton's lead in CA came from illegals.

 

[danielpalos]

California: Land Of The Stupid. All votes for Hillary should be deducted!!!

Only for the clueless and the Causeless.

It took California three weeks to figure it out. The South is still looking for their lost clue and their lost Cause.

The economy of California is the largest in the United States. As of 2015, California's gross state product (GSP) is about $2.496 trillion. The state's GSP grew 4.1% in 2015.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_California