Uh ... does someone want to explain to Ray why this is embarrassingly stupid? I just can't anymore, with this guy. If he is not making up lies, he is saying things that are just flat out stupid. I can't waste my time with his worthless posts anymore.
Actually, he's spot on here. If we were to elect the President by popular vote, people would vote differently. Candidates would campaign differently. There's no way of knowing how that would have turned out.
Why not have a closer look at that?
If votes are all that counts, campaigning would overwhelmingly target the biggest, most concentrated population blocks. Why campaign in a village with 40 folks? That doesn't make sense. However, these huge population blocks are also mostly liberal, so I can't quite see how that would increase Trump's chances in a popular-vote election.
Also, as it stands, there is a solid majority of States voting GOP in presidential elections, and far fewer reliably voting Dem - the rest are battleground states. In these GOP States, liberals going to vote is more or less pointless (the opposite is true for conservatives in far fewer solid-Dem states). So, in a popular vote election, Dems in far more states could be motivated to vote, since their votes suddenly count, than conservatives in solid-liberal States. Again, I don't know how Trump would fare better.
Overall, I'd say, based on Trump's popular vote loss, and the above assessment, FFI has a point claiming that in a democracy (popular vote election) Trump wouldn't have happened, and is unlikely to happen given the trend set in 2018. Of course, proof this is not, but...