Hillary Clintion Leads by 1.7 Million in Popular Vote. More than both JFK's and Carter's Victories

[Vandalshandle]

This just in. 2,870,973 illegal aliens have been found in Hillary's basement. Also discovered was a clown car in which they were all driven to a polling station to vote for her. Trump has decided not to ask for a special prosecutor because he does not want to hurt the clintons. Trump is going to deport 2,059,081 rapists and drug dealers, but has offered the others, who he refers to as "good people'" jobs as busboys in his resorts.

 

[Pogo]

This just in. 2,870,973 illegal aliens have been found in Hillary's basement. Also discovered was a clown car in which they were all driven to a polling station to vote for her. Trump has decided not to ask for a special prosecutor because he does not want to hurt the clintons. Trump is going to deport 2,059,081 rapists and drug dealers, but has offered the others, who he refers to as "good people'" jobs as busboys in his resorts.

You left out that the clown car was driven by "thousands and thousands" of Amish, after they got down off the roof.

 

[Pogo]

Latest numbers from Cook:

Rump:62,808,243
Clinton: 65,462,476
Difference: 2,654,233

Here's what's more interesting now:

As the votes are counted the disparity expressed as a percentage has grown to in excess of 2 per cent; Clinton now has 48.2% to Rump's 46.2 (rounded off)

When was the last time -- or any time -- a POTUS came into office with that low a level of popular support?

It has happened, three times since the 19th century:

• 1993 (Bill Clinton, 43.0%)
  
• 1968 (Richard Nixon, 43.4%)
• 1912 (Woodrow Wilson, 41.8%)

The thing is ---- all three of those were three-candidate races where a third party took a considerable (> 10%) bite out of the total PV

• Clinton had Perot, who took just under 19%;
• Nixon had Wallace, who took 13%;
• Wilson had Taft and TR, who took 23% and 27% as well as Debs (6%).

Looking back even further the only other instances in the current two-party system were Cleveland in 1892 who got 46.02% of the popular vote, just a hair under Rump's total right now; and Lincoln in 1860 (at 39.7).

But Cleveland also had a third party candy (Weaver, Populist 8.5%) and Lincoln not only had three other major contenders (all of whom pulled at least 12%) but his name wasn't even on the ballot in the South.

All of which gives Rump the lowest level of popular support in any Democrat-Republican two-candidate race ever.

 

[Dubya Da Last Repug Prez]

Latest numbers from Cook:

Rump:62,808,243
Clinton: 65,462,476
Difference: 2,654,233

Here's what's more interesting now:

As the votes are counted the disparity expressed as a percentage has grown to in excess of 2 per cent; Clinton now has 48.2% to Rump's 46.2 (rounded off)

When was the last time -- or any time -- a POTUS came into office with that low a level of popular support?

It has happened, three times since the 19th century:

• 1993 (Bill Clinton, 43.0%)
  
• 1968 (Richard Nixon, 43.4%)
• 1912 (Woodrow Wilson, 41.8%)

The thing is ---- all three of those were three-candidate races where a third party took a considerable (> 10%) bite out of the total PV

• Clinton had Perot, who took just under 19%;
• Nixon had Wallace, who took 13%;
• Wilson had Taft and TR, who took 23% and 27% as well as Debs (6%).

Looking back even further the only other instances in the current two-party system were Cleveland in 1892 who got 46.02% of the popular vote, just a hair under Rump's total right now; and Lincoln in 1860 (at 39.7).

But Cleveland also had a third party candy (Weaver, Populist 8.5%) and Lincoln not only had three other major contenders (all of whom pulled at least 12%) but his name wasn't even on the ballot in the South.

All of which gives Rump the lowest level of popular support in any Democrat-Republican two-candidate race ever.

Much obliged for the update!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Latest numbers from Cook:

Rump:62,808,243
Clinton: 65,462,476
Difference: 2,654,233

Here's what's more interesting now:

As the votes are counted the disparity expressed as a percentage has grown to in excess of 2 per cent; Clinton now has 48.2% to Rump's 46.2 (rounded off)

When was the last time -- or any time -- a POTUS came into office with that low a level of popular support?

It has happened, three times since the 19th century:

• 1993 (Bill Clinton, 43.0%)
  
• 1968 (Richard Nixon, 43.4%)
• 1912 (Woodrow Wilson, 41.8%)

The thing is ---- all three of those were three-candidate races where a third party took a considerable (> 10%) bite out of the total PV

• Clinton had Perot, who took just under 19%;
• Nixon had Wallace, who took 13%;
• Wilson had Taft and TR, who took 23% and 27% as well as Debs (6%).

Looking back even further the only other instances in the current two-party system were Cleveland in 1892 who got 46.02% of the popular vote, just a hair under Rump's total right now; and Lincoln in 1860 (at 39.7).

But Cleveland also had a third party candy (Weaver, Populist 8.5%) and Lincoln not only had three other major contenders (all of whom pulled at least 12%) but his name wasn't even on the ballot in the South.

All of which gives Rump the lowest level of popular support in any Democrat-Republican two-candidate race ever.

So what? Trump is STILL President and Hillary LOST.