No, Hillary Clinton did not win the popular vote.

“Hillary won the popular vote!”

No, she didn’t. She “won” a sideshow no one was even aiming for. And you are an embarrassment for thinking she is “the people’s choice” because of it.

Here’s the deal: She only received more votes in a contest where receiving more votes was mutually agreed to be irrelevant. Labeling this meaningless sideshow the “popular vote” is merely for entertainment. Stop acting like it’s speaking volumes.

If this election were indeed decided by the popular vote, Donald Trump definitely would’ve changed his campaign strategy from Day One. It is delusional to pronounce now with any presumed certainty that Hillary would’ve still won the popular vote when the popular vote actually matters.

Attempting to move the goal post after the contest has already concluded is the very definition of a sore loser. And within the context of a presidential election?

The attempt is simply anti-democracy.

To put it differently, would you try to change the outcome of a football game from points scored to how loud the fans cheered, after you lost on points but got more screaming fans? For your sake, I hope not.

The Electoral College system (EC) is here for a reason. Whether you disagree with that reason or are simply ignorant about it is your prerogative. It does not change the fact that every single one of us, including you, took part in this election with the understanding that victory is based on electoral votes and not the popular vote.

Of course, if you honestly didn’t know that the EC was the ultimate gate keeper, then you really have no one else but yourself to blame. The only person you are a victim to is you and your ignorance.

So, do yourself a favor and stop championing this “Hillary won the popular vote” nonsense. If you don’t find the EC to be your cup of tea, try to have it removed going forward. Please do. This is what democracy is about. But to renege on the rules you agreed on post facto is simply pathetic.

Enjoyed this post? Fuming with rage? Follow us on Facebook or Twitter and tell us how you feel!

6 thoughts on “No, Hillary Clinton did not win the popular vote.

  1. I agree with you in one major way. It would be wrong for liberals to underhandedly change the rules after the election because they were “unfavorable” to them. Consistent rules (within a single election period) are the groundworks for a fair election.

    The problem with your article is twofold. First you’re granting an uncharitable interpretation to the position of people saying “Clinton won the popular vote.” Here’s an alternative and more reasonable interpretation here. The statement “Hilary won the popular vote” isn’t an attempt to overthrow an established system, but rather argues that Trump doesn’t have a clean electoral mandate. He’s beholden to ALL voters, not simply the constituency who voted for him, and the fact that he lost the popular vote by 2 million people is an indication that he must not presume that he has all of America’s support for his campaign platform. When your opponent’s platform is literally more popular by manner of votes, then it’s time to consider the merits of that platform.

    Second, your football analogy is sloppy. Obviously the scoring of a football game shouldn’t be won by the loudness of cheers; points and popularity are two different things. In politics though votes and electoral votes are substantively similar. Votes themselves constitute parts of electoral votes and should be considered in the “game” itself. We shouldn’t consider the political arena a place where one group ‘wins’ and the other must conversely ‘lose.’ Unless you think that the losing party’s votes are made invalid by their candidate losing (which would be a terrible precedent to set). Trump must be aware of the reality that the majority of people did not vote for him and have every right to be concerned about how his policymaking will affect them. Saying Clinton won the popular vote vocalizes this concern.

    One final note. Donald Trump’s tweet that he won the popular vote justifies the perpetuation of Clinton’s popular vote win in social media. Trump saying he won the popular vote delegitimizes millions of voters and exacerbates this false notion that Trump’s policies are popular (in the majority) by virtue of his win. Factually this is not the case.


    1. LOL you do realize that the election map is consistent with a map of sanctuary cities to an alarming degree. If you dont those popular votes would be swung in trumps direction after all the ILLEGAL VOTING by ILLEGAL CITIZENS purposely brought here and pandered to in a sickening way by democrats. If there was any chance the popular vote mattered trump has the resources to audit all the sanctuary city precincts himself and would surely do so because its obvious there was massive illegal alien voter fraud. States like california accepted a fucking utility or cell phone bill as ID. Sometimes they didnt ask anyone for anything. Look in to it before you assume her vote account is even semi legitimate. The anomalies in exit polls vs votes for clinton has been declared by statistic experts as 5x the percent of what they would consider blatant voter fraud during the primary’s that were exposed as being entirely rigged for hillary. Another glaring example is a news network reported that hillary appointed a foreign donor to the fucking nuclear defense division by force. The members who were mostly very intelligent people had no idea why this person with no knowledge or experience was being handed classified info and then ”retired” a few days later. At the end of the news segment they appeared visually stunned when they confirmed that man was also a FUCKING SUPERDELEGATE IN THE UPCOMING PRIMARIES! There was even a wikileaks hack that was never denied by clinton and instead they pushed a narrative that the fucking russians did it with zero legit evidence of this. After obummer claimed the american government claimed they wouldnt rig the election he quickly blamed russia for apparently being much more intelligent than their computer scientists who couldnt spot a massively exploitation in a simple piece of vital technology that had no connection to the fucking internet. None of the media focused on the alarming content of the emais and the DNC was legendarily bad. Everyone got booed off stage and then 2/3 of the people left in protest so the DNC paid people 15 bucks an hour to be loyal seat fillers presenting a farce. This trend of bullshit extended all the way through the general election with podesta emails and spirit and the FBIs bullshit decision after a very unethical meeting bill clinton and loretta lynch where days later comey came out in public and basically said it as subtly yet obvious as possible that any other person would certainly be indicted for this shit and that she definitely was sending massive amounts of confidencial info. Even obummer got busted emailing her private account under a fucking fake name and claiming on national television that the server definitely didnt exist and even if there was foul play he had no idea. Even the source of clintons donors is riddled with globalist billionaires who have a lot to gain by increasing the human slave labor trade that goes on with illegal immigration and destabilizing countries. This isnt even their first rodeo. George fucking soros the billionaire even had the hubris to write books about destroying nations by spreading the type of marxist SJW propaganda as human rights with nefarious reasons. He even clearly states and i quote that ”destroying the united states is my greatist goal”. This man has also met with obama in his personal home on several occasions. I could say a fucking lot more but ill digress because if this hasnt swayed you nothing will. Dont believe me, look it up for yourself to confirm.


      1. @Jason Soros

        Might I suggest the enter key? It creates paragraphs which maybe used to distinguish between ideas. I think that you might consider that before you post another incoherent and loosely strung together paragraph. You moved so quickly between illegal voting and Marxism that you honestly lost me.

        In any case, don’t think I haven’t noticed how you sidestepped my argument without responding to it. My comment makes a claim about how popular vote is relevant to the the post-election political situation which accepts, as the original article does, that Clinton won the popular vote. You’re fabricating an argument about how she didn’t win the popular vote which doesn’t respond to my argument which is more theoretical. Consider this: I don’t have to defend that Clinton won the popular vote in order for the central claim of my argument to hold true.

        Moreover, I’m arguing within the frame of the article which itself accepts the premise that Clinton won the popular vote. Here’s a quote from the article: “She only received more votes in a contest where receiving more votes was mutually agreed to be irrelevant.” Note that the article does not contest the idea that Clinton won the popular vote.

        Feel free to continue with these claims about “fake votes” or counterfactuals about how Trump would’ve won even if the election were controlled by popular vote. Just know that you aren’t answering my argument, and you come off as desperate and sycophantic when you do.

        I leave you with this one question: Supposing that the losing candidate (doesn’t have to be Clinton if that triggers you) DID in fact receive the popular vote, how should the winning candidate respond to those voters?


    2. 65,788,583 + 62,955,363 = 128,743,946 total
      128,743,946 – 2.175% = 2,800,180.8255 votes
      Hillary winning 2.8 mil more votes than Trump is true but that’s 2.175% more Americans voting for Hillary so no one has the majority!

      All this whining and protesting because Hillary is 2.175% more popular than Trump?

      Hillary excepted the results why can’t her supporters?


  2. So a few things we see here.

    1 this article is bs. Hillary undeniably won the popular vote. You don’t pick and choose states that “count”. Hillary won period.

    2. There is a moron in the comments that thinks illegals voted in the election while ignoring the only documented case of voter fraud this election was a trump supporter who tried to vote twice.


  3. @dumblibtardthatthinkswhatever idiot.

    First of all, take California off the map, and Trump wins the popular vote. They’ve been wanting to leave forever anyway, so let them. Secondly, and I’m really shocked at how many people don’t recognise this fact and understand our REPUBLIC. We are not a democracy. We didn’t vote for a presidential candidate. We voted for party electors. Those party electors represent each states views based on how their state voted. That’s why it is “Government for and by the people” not MOB RULE or Majority rule democracy. Now you may want to change the constitution to make America a real Democracy but that won’t ensure that Democrats win every election like you want. If you change the U.S. Constitution to reflect our government as a Democracy, do you really think you will be allowed to keep operating states as republics? The same rules will apply to individual states as well, and the entire dynamics of politics in the U.S. will change as well, but what it won’t do is ensure Democrats a victory in every single future election. And let’s face it, that is what you want, right?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s