If the 2016 Election Was Based on the Popular Vote, Trump Would Have Still Been Elected

[kidd]

The following facts are provided for your use when you encounter a liberal relative at Thanksgiving:

There are still about 4 million votes to be counted.
Except for Michigan (which is just too close to call at this time), these uncounted votes cannot affect the distribution of electoral votes between the candidates.

The New York Times reports that Clinton has won 47.9% of the popular vote while Donald Trump has won 47.1% of the popular vote.

Numerous entertainers on the left have proclaimed that Clinton would have won if we were not choosing our president on the "outdated" electoral system.
Ignorant Barbara Boxer has even introduced a bill to change the Constitutional method of electing a president (snort!)

But most of theses entertainers ignore one fact: Hillary Clinton did not, and can not, win a MAJORITY of the popular vote.
(Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson won at least 4,225,894 votes)

A MAJORITY, not a plurality is required to win. If no candidate receives a MAJORITY of votes, then in accordance with the 12th amendment, the House of Representatives would elect the president, which is controlled by a strong majority of Republicans. Even if the electoral college had been trashed, Trump still would be President.

For Hillary Clinton to have been elected president, both the electoral college AND the majority vote requirement would have had to have been trashed.

[LateForLunch]

And not only that, the rule in many states is that as soon as the remaining uncounted votes are less than the margin of separation between candidates or ballot initiatives, the election workers stop counting votes. That's correct. So not all votes are counted - only enough votes to determine a winner based on certified totals.

In other words, if there is a state in which 98% of the ballots are counted, but the margin of separation between the leading candidate and the trailing candidate is 4%, the remaining 2% of the votes will be  uncounted and the candidate with the greater part of the 98% of the votes cast in their favor is declared the winner (since the trailing candidate could not possibly win even if all the remaining uncounted votes were cast for them, and the margin is greater than the threshold for a mandatory recount).

This is done in order to save costs. 

The uncounted ballots are retained in the event that some significant portion of the previously-counted votes are disallowed and cannot be certified, so that if needed they may be included in the revised total. But to my knowledge that has never happened in any state in any national election.

What this means however is that in some areas where Trump won by much greater margins than the uncounted votes, a significant number of votes for Trump went uncounted and will never be added to the vote totals. Selah.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Pointless rhetoric.

It is NOT based upon the popular vote. Neither is the Supreme Court nominee.  Should we hold go ahead and rhetorically do that as well?

[Cripplecreek]

Pointless rhetoric.

It is NOT based upon the popular vote. Neither is the Supreme Court nominee.  Should we hold go ahead and rhetorically do that as well?

 

[LateForLunch]

Well maybe I'm not getting what the above two posters meant but I don't think the original post is pointless at all.  ^-^

Maybe you two nice folks could be more specific about why you believe it is. I am not trying to be argumentative - I'm interested in learning. 

[Cripplecreek]

Its pointless because the popular vote has no bearing on reality and discussing it is pointless because its not going to change.

[LateForLunch]

Its pointless because the popular vote has no bearing on reality and discussing it is pointless because its not going to change.

TYVM Crippplecreek! "The popular vote has no bearing on reality" That is a fascinating statement. I really don't mean to trouble you overly, and without meaning to be the slightest bit sarcastic, could you elaborate just a little more so that I can understand fully exactly what you mean?