The Democrats' misguided effort to turn the Electoral College vote

Joe Cunningham:
...
It would be one thing if Donald Trump won. But it wasn’t just him. It was the entire Republican Party. I don’t use the term “mandate” when it comes to elections, but if I did, I would say this is about as clear a mandate as you could get.

  • Republicans, despite all odds, kept the Senate with a 52-48 majority. Despite all the polling, which panicked many Republicans going into that fateful Tuesday, the Republican Party set itself up to keep and even extend their majority over the next 2-4 years.
  • Republicans kept the House with a decisive 241-194 majority. They lost a net total of six seats, but competed well in races they should not have.
  • Republicans now have 32 state legislatures and 33 governor’s mansions, marking this as one of the most dominant Republican eras in American history.

If Hillary Clinton were the real winner based on the fact that she got more votes, wouldn’t that have given Republicans more losses? It is true that the Republicans lost six a net six House seats and two Senate seats, but the gains at the state level more than make up for it. Republicans have been largely running up the score in three of the last four major election cycles.
...
This is a good counter argument to the Democrats' popular vote one.   It demonstrates how really unpopular Democrats are in most of the country.  The popular vote total is also skewed by the fact that Trump did not contest some blue states, focusing instead on winnable battleground states.  It would have been a very different election if it was based on the popular vote, but not necessarily one that Democrats would have won.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Iraq says civilian casualties in Mosul caused by ISIS booby trap, not US air strike

Liberal fascists strike against Trump supporters in Berkeley

OPEC reduces production again in price maintenance program