So WAS this a repudiation of "politics as usual"?

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-09-2016, 11:39 PM)Dill Wrote: What?   There is no "statistical advantage" when all votes are lumped together. The fact that you voted in NY or CA doesn't mean your vote counts more or "skews" anything. 

If the popular vote were run like the electoral college, then you would have a point. If Hilllary wins CA by 51% and all 100% of the votes go to her, then "density" would skew the popular vote. But that is not how it works.

Or perhaps you think that "statistical advantage" would be lost if the US population were spread evenly per square mile over the whole country?  

That is something that would render my point moot. If you took everyone in NY and Cali and spread them throughout the US, it doesn't change the outcome--Clinton still wins the overall popular vote. Problem is, that's not the way it is. You can only say that she won the popular vote because she had such a massive statistical advantage in 2 out of the 50 states. Without such an advantage there, the numbers show that everyone else across the US favored Trump. 

I'm not saying either argument is right or wrong. Just using a trimmed mean to show that a blanket statement like "won the popular vote" isn't indicative of the overall because the outliers give a clear advantage to one side.