He played the system. He won it by its rules. It sucks how long it's taking the Left to get over it. Sorest losers in US election history, modern at least. I wouldn't be too proud about Clinton's "popular votes" since without the states of New York and California, she doesn't have a political leg to stand on in the USA today.
and thats not the electoral college map, that would look much different. like this, https://blogs-images.forbes.com/alexknapp/files/2016/11/AZ.jpg?width=960 what he shared is the maps of the individual counties that voted for our president, which proves multiple things, including that your polls are very wrong.
What? That's not a response. Obviously only one president would have their ratings in the shitter. There will always be one. The point was, Clinton would be in the shitter too given how toxic current US politics is.
yes because as I've said so many damn times now, the polls aren't a fair representation. Thats what the map that @Praetorian shared was displaying for you.
Pretty sure regarding polls and expectations, the ones with egg on their face were Clinton supporters. At this point, I'd assume he's right and MSNBC or CNN type logic or polling is plain
Anyway, now that Hillary's been shoehorned in yet another thread as a deflection attempt, I guess that's out of the way. Thought this was an informative little read. Did Donald Trump Jr break the law? - BBC News
You brought up how Trump "didn't win the popular vote". It was pointed out to you how legally pointless and politically inconsequential that lament is. Then it was pointed out to you how Clinton's "popular votes" (since you're attacking Trump's) completely hinged on the votes and lifestyles of two states. This of course brings us back full circle to the shiny red map, that shows that it is not in fact, a "tiny percentage" as you claim, that would still support Trump today.
I brought up the fact that Trump didn't win the popular vote because you're the one who posts this silly map from thread to thread as if it disproves Trump's underwhelming approval ratings currently, over the past seven months of his presidency, or the fact that he did not win the popular vote. He won the electoral college; he did not win the people, which is a fact that certainly matters if you're going to insinuate he's more well-liked by the American public than he is. See how I managed to keep my response about Trump? Trump's approval rating is currently 37% among adults. Call it big, call it tiny, I don't really care.
And it was explained how without NY or CA, Clinton wouldn't be a blip on the American political radar. That, in conjunction with the fact that Trump won fair and square, seems like a legit presidency. Hard to tell sometimes with all the "protesters" and whiny political pundits. Where do you think Clinton would be at this point in ratings, considering the political polarization currently going on in the US?
Dude, there's literally a whole thread dedicated to Hillary talk. Multiple probably. I'm actually here to talk about Trump & Jr.
Of course you are Spliffy, where else would you be? Still though, it would be convenient to know, before you continue to rip into the Donald's rating, how good of a rating do you honestly believe Hilary Clinton would receive in today's polarized America? (Polarized well before the 2016 election)
It doesn't prove anything except that people who live in low density areas tend to vote more for the GOP. But it's still a fact that Clinton won the popular vote by about 2.1 percent. The final rcp average of polling was 3.2 percent for Clinton which was about 1 percent off. To get within 1 percent is fairly accurate.
boy,, if she was unknown its pretty hard to come to the conclusion she is some giant player for the entire fucking russian government doesn't it?
Why is it that you can discount millions of people because they live i NY or CA. Is their voice not as important as people who live in bumble fuck nowhere. You could easily say GOP hinges on Texas and Florida which provide them with a shitload of votes and EC votes. How is that any different from the point you're making? Why is it that living in a city means your voice or vote is not as important as someone who lives somewhere with less people. Seems like kind of an irrational system.