I disagree. A vote for someone means only that you'd prefer that person win over the alternative. Why you prefer them, or how "good" you consider them in an absolute sense, or whether their policies are ones you personally endorse, can't be determined by the mere fact of a vote. It's a statement of relative preference, not absolute preference.
But that is not how it is taken
@Maj. Bill Martin .
Nobody does all that navel gazing. Tumpy went forth like he had a mandate, even though it was a very narrow win, and with a depressed electorate.
And I will bet you money that had it gone the other way, Clinton would have done the same.
There is nothing for it. You only have an affirmative vote, and the vote you cast is approval of the agenda and the man.
All the rest is nonsense.