Democracy in action Trump has fewer votes than Clinton

.

 

It's still technically possible for the result to be different. The electoral college votes don't have to be cast for the candidate who won the state, when it convenes to decide who the president is going to be on 19 December. They usually are cast for the candidate who won the state, but they don't have to be. For example 25 of the 38 Texas electors might decide to support Clinton instead of Trump. Unlikely but possible.​

 

George Bush snr and George W Bush (2nd time) both won the popular vote and president. W lost the popular vote to Al Gore in 2000 but won President. Before that, it was Benjamin Harrison in 1888 who was President after losing the popular vote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin

Given the events of September 2001, you have to wonder how different the world would be if Gore had won Florida...

 

I'd read it again. Trump is only the 5th in history to lose the popular vote but win the election.

 

Definitely could happen here, for the reason you state, but I'm not sure it ever has. Could well be wrong on that though.

I don't think it's unfair that Trump has won. That's the system in the US. I just think those that voted for him are off their ******* heads.

 

^^^^^this wearing a wig and dancing to Vicar in a tutu^^^^^

 

In 2015 the Tories took power with 36.9% of the vote in a 66.1% turnout. This gave them a 12 seat overall majority. If you live in South Cambridgeshire as I do the battle is between the Tories and the libdems so a labour vote is wasted. Similarly in Barnsley a Tory may be similarly disadvantaged although the surprising lurch to the right in the referendum argues against that. The government are in the process of introducing boundary changes that mean that they can rule with an even smaller share of the vote. This is known as gerrymandering or rigging the vote in favour of your party.
In the meantime the left has gone AWOL unable to find a credible response to the neoliberalism begun by Thatcherite economist. Under Blair the Labour Party embraced these economics. Dark days indeed.

 

This graph neatly puts paid to the theory that a rise in racist, xenophobic and women hating votes from the right was responsible for Trump winning. His vote was actually down slightly on Mitt Romney's in the previous election. Clinton lost due to a collapse in the vote from Democratic supporters after Obama. Although historically it's still up slightly on the democratic norm.

The media are doing their best to spin this as a rise in votes for racism, women hating etc. Ignore it. It is most definitely NOT the case. Clinton lost because democrats didnt like her.

 

Spot on.

 

UKIP got the 3rd highest votes

And 1 Parliamentary seat.

The Greens nearly had as many votes as the SNP, 1 seat v 56.

**** happens.

 

It's seems the final count is in and Trump won both
HTH

 

Only if you are unable to read properly! Clinton is currently .5% (570,000 or so) ahead, with 7 *million* postal votes still to count - mostly in California and New York so her lead is expected to increase in the popular vote.

 

Well maybe
https://70news.wordpress.com/2016/1...hey-change-org-scrap-your-loony-petition-now/

 

Tbf that's definitely a website I'd use to get factual information from

 

its all irrelevant anyway,Trump won.

 

I know , brilliant aren't they , ha ha ha
Deks bang on though int he

 

Happened here in 1951 and Feb 1974.

It's the first-past-the-post system, we rejected the fairer PR system.

 

We didn't. The vote was on AV.