I was responding only to your vain boastful no everything comment which you continued while never answering my questionHow do EC electors get selected? Does it have anything to do with the popular vote?Polls are BS. What part about they're never right have people missed?
Next.
The part that they are usually right and correctly predicted who would win the popular vote in 2016. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016 by 2.09% points
There is no such thing as the "popular vote." It doesn't exist other than as an informal number that some people calculated and put out there. In this country we use the electoral college:
Constitution of the United States
View the full United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, and all Amendments online. Additional summaries and explanations.constitutionus.com
You can't take data for an election based on a set of criteria that voters knew the election was based on (EV) and conclude that if you changed the rules and use the same data it would turn out the same way.
1) The campaigns campaigned for the EV not the PV. For example, where they ran ads and where they went to influence voters
2) There are actually tens of millions of Republicans in places like California who knew their vote was worthless in the EV. That wouldn't have been true if we used the PV
I can't believe you don't know this BASIC information. Didn't exactly go to college, did you?
No. The national Popular vote, what he referred to, has nothing to do with ECs being elected.
What you are doing is changing what he said, which is a national popular vote, and changing it to sound like he meant it at the State level.
Just FYI the logical fallacy you just committed is called equivocation