by Jim » Mon Nov 14, 2016 8:49 am
The case for the electoral college, which one party or the other disapproves every election account the results, is made easily this cycle. The difference in vote totals nationally was a mere 600,000 between Trump (60,400,000) and Clinton (61,000,000). In New York (29 electoral votes) Clinton had a plurality of 1,500,000 and in California (55 electoral votes) a plurality of 2,700,000, ergo Clinton had a plurality in just those two states of 4,200,000 (84 electoral votes). So, Trump could have been defeated overwhelmingly (popular vote) by two states, never mind the other 48. Actually, just the big city votes could have done him in – NYC, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego, hotbeds of give-away entitlements. Add Chicago, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Memphis, Philadelphia, etc., all welfare-type cities, and get the picture throughout the country, the non-taxpayers collecting from the taxpayers. That's how the electoral college makes sense and the founders realized this. Just New York and California own 84 electoral votes, almost a third of the 270 needed to win, the devil take the rest of the country.