NewJerseyRich wrote:http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37889032
a few numbers .... Number of states won:
Trump: 30
Clinton: 20
_________________
Trump: +10
Square miles of land does not equal a democracy. States don't get votes based on how many square miles they contain.
Number of electoral votes won:
Trump: 306
Clinton: 232
_________________
Trump: + 68
As discussed previously, the Electoral College is bullshit. It was put into place to allow less populous states to still "matter" (along with the "slave are worth 3/5 of a person when determining a state's population for congressional representation" bullshit). The EC means that a vote in North Dakota is worth more than a vote in California or Texas. This is counter to what a democracy is supposed to be.
Ave. margin of victory in winning states:
Trump: 56%
Clinton: 53.5%
_________________
Trump: + 2.5 points
OK.
Popular vote total:
Trump: 62,958,211
Clinton: 65,818,318
_________________
Clinton: + 2.8 million
~66m > ~63m. That is how a democracy works.
Popular vote total outside California:
Trump: 58,474,401
Clinton: 57,064,530
_________________
Trump: + 1.4 million
So ... Exclude a large population and the results are different? Shocking.
Nothing you've said here counters what I said though. I said that ~20-25% of the US population supports this incompetent and his pack of venal raiders. ~20-25% pretty much opposes him and everything he stands for. And ~50% of the population couldn't be bothered to vote and therefore goes in the "indifferent" bucket.
The USofA currently has 318m citizens. By the numbers you quote above only ~140m bothered to vote at all. That means that 178m people don't have a particularly strong opinion, AND that the ~20% that voted for this certainly didn't give a mandate.

