Exclusive: Putin-linked think tank drew up plan to sway 2016 U.S. election - document

[Dill]

(04-21-2017, 04:11 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: The issue here is that when people say the "majority" of Americans voted for Clinton it creates this illusion that a staggering amount of people voted for Clinton throughout the nation rather than Trunp. But when you take into account all the States and the counties within them, the popularity for Trump stretches farther than the popularity of Clinton.

So, Clinton being "popular" is meaningless when you can't actually apply that label to the majority of people that live in other states besides California.

Why should the factual record create an "illusion" among people who can count and understand percentages?

Clinton won the Majority in New York. Trump won the majority in North Dakota.  So Trump's popularity stretches farther in ND. You think there are people who do not understand this? You believe there are people who think Clinton was more popular in Alabama?

Did Clinton get more votes or did she not? If she got more votes, then she won the popular vote.
Do you agree that she got more votes or do you not?

And if you agree that she did, then what are you really on about? Are you saying people should not say she won the popular vote? What should they say?

The sitting president does not agree that Clinton won the popular vote. The factual record does not support him in this, so he claims that the factual record must be wrong (not in North Dakota and Alabama, just in "liberal bastions"). 3-5 million illegal voters somewhere.

When Trump doesn't like the existing record of facts, he provides alternative facts. If you are a Trump supporter, are you following your leader in this? Are you somehow trying to squeeze a popular win out of the election by pushing the ILLUSION that winning more states means winning the popular vote?