• LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Sure, the national popular vote total doesn’t determine the presidency, but it’s also not “meaningless”. The popular vote winner has won the presidency all but 5x in US history.

    • TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I feel like we’ve strayed very far from the original statement.

      I’m just gonna keep hammering this in for a while. 81 million Democrats voted in 2020, but only 71 million this year. Trump won by 3.5 million. But hey, at least all you righteous little angels aren’t “complicit in genocide”, right? Think about that while you polish your halos. YOU did this.

      In our electoral college system the total national vote isn’t the cause of a president getting elected. Many of the people who didn’t turn out were in states that were already considered Democrat strongholds such as New Jersey. Only seven states mattered. They were close enough that the polls weren’t able to tell who was in the lead. Both Republicans and Democrats spent a lot of money on spreading their message and getting out the vote. These seven states had record or near record turn out.

      In light of all of this, what is your argument?

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        In simple terms, if those 10 million Democrats had voted for Kamala there’s a good chance she would have won. It would depend on where those people live, but even if you simplemindedly divide 10 million by 50 you average 200k votes in every state. This is far more than Trump’s lead in any of the swing states, and she only would have had to win a few of them.