I was hoping Trump would win both the electoral vote and the popular vote, so we wouldn’t have to deal with ignorant liberals again taking issue with the electoral college system. Clinton supporters, who criticized Trump for refusing to rule out any possibility that he would contest the results of the election, are now themselves, refusing to accept the election results.
They’re claiming Hillary was the real winner of this election because she got over 600,000 more votes than Trump, and now naturally, they want the electoral college system eliminated. Ridiculous Michael Moore even went to Trump Tower recently to deliver a note to Trump that stated, “you lost, step aside.” Does the map displayed above look like the map of a loser?
The real losers like Michael Moore are failing to understand something very important. This is the United States of America, and to become president you have to convince the different states to vote for you. An election based solely on the popular vote would give more heavily populated areas an unfair advantage over the less populated suburbs and rural areas.
An election result based on the popular vote alone wouldn’t truly represent the will of the states that make up the country. It would represent only the will of the urban voters.
Let’s use an example that a delusional, anti-electoral-college Clinton voter can understand. Let’s pretend for a minute that the completely made up narrative that the Clinton campaign created to convince voters that Trump is a Putin puppet, is true. And let’s say that part of the Putin-Trump conspiracy is for Russia to join the United States as its 51st state, with Putin as its governor. Are you with me so far?
Russia would become the largest state, with a population of over 140 million. The next largest state would of course be California, which has roughly 40 million people. Trump-hating liberals wouldn’t stand a chance in the next election against the 112 million potentially Trump-loving Russians of voting age. To add insult to injury, Russia’s voter turnout is 15% higher than turnout in the United States. Not good.
Let’s crunch some numbers. The U.S. voting population in 2016 was about 250 million. Russia’s 112 million would mean Russia could potentially contribute 45% of the popular vote in a U.S. election. Do you think those protesting Trump’s win would still think it a good idea to elect presidents by popular vote, under this scenario?
Under the electoral college system in my hypothetical scenario, the U.S. state of Russia would be awarded about 202 electoral votes, since it would have roughly 200 house representatives. (Each state gets an electoral vote for each senator and one for each house representative, and there is one representative per about 700,000 people).
This means Russia’s 202 electoral votes would represent 27% of the total electoral votes. This sounds much better than 45%, no?
This is why the electoral college system matters. Choosing a president based on the popular vote would be like deciding who wins the World Series based on the total number of runs scored and not on the number of games won.
Step aside, Michael Moore. You lost.
- None Found