Without California, Trump Wins Popular Vote by 1.4 Million

With the final election results coming in now, it looks like Hillary Clinton will end up winning the popular vote by some 2.8 million votes. And, just like Al Gore, Clinton will go on to be seen by millions of disgruntled liberals as the “true” president because of this seeming disparity.

But it’s just talk. Liberals can worship Clinton, disparage the Electoral College, and criticize Donald Trump all they want and it won’t change the fact that they lost. They lost, despite having the entirety of the “system” behind their candidate. They lost, despite having nearly every newspaper in the country endorsing Hillary. They lost, despite having every advantage in the book.

But what about this popular vote business? Does it even hold any water rhetorically? Certainly, it’s meaningless as far as the actual election goes; this was always a race to 270 electoral votes and never a race for the popular vote victory. As Trump himself has said numerous times, he would have run a very different campaign if the goal was to win the popular vote. Furthermore, people would vote very differently. As it stands now, Republicans in California have little motivation to vote in a presidential election because the outcome is essentially predetermined. If this was an all-out, nationwide campaign for every vote, that wouldn’t be the case.

Speaking of California, it’s worth pointing out that it is wholly responsible for Hillary’s popular vote lead. If you were to subtract the state, Trump would have bested her by 1.4 million votes. This is exactly why we don’t use the popular vote as the determining factor in our elections. All of a sudden, you hand an extraordinary amount of power and influence to a handful of densely-populated, coastal enclaves that have very little in common with the rest of the country. This is how you wind up with a system of liberal tyranny.

Abolishing the Electoral College would put us on the road to the death of the Republic. Eventually, we would no longer be a collection of unionized states; we would simply be one enormous country. Power would flow to the federal government even more quickly than it does now, and we would cease to look anything like the U.S. envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

But that’s exactly what the left wants. They are tired of all those “backwards” red states and their conservatism. Fairness? They couldn’t care less. They just want to win.

When they don’t, they whine about it.

But while they’re whining, our side is running the country. We’ll take that arrangement any day.

Comments are closed.