A new poll shows 52% of Republicans actually think Trump won the popular vote

Yep, and Idaho's two senators have the same power as New York and California senators. With what, 1 percent of the population numbers? How rigged is that? More than half this country sensibly refrains from voting, because they know the system is rigged.

 

With a statement like that, you'd think that "Russians hacked the election to help Trump win" came straight out of Rightwing Land.

 

So you are saying that California voters should only be counted as 2/3 of a citizen. Where have we heard that before ... thinking, thinking ...

 

Those scientists are lying for a political agenda but you damn well better not disbelieve the scientists that are preaching about global warming.

 

It has been. Again, not saying Trump didn't win. Just pointing out that he had to rely on a rigged system to do it. The fact that it was rigged a long time ago doesn't
change that fact.

Obama won BOTH the popular vote AND the EC ... twice ... just saying.

 

Stupid liberals still haven't learned their lesson about 'polls.'

 

Ok let's go down this rabbit hole.

How, exactly, is a system thats been in place well over a hundred years, everyone knows and understands, rigged?

Did it change suddenly somehow?

 

And their reliability hasn't changed one iota.

 

It says no such thing, which is why you failed to produce a quote from the article.

In fact, the article says the exact opposite of what you are claiming:

 

No. A pure system would simply be that the guy with the most popular votes wins. A rigged system would be one where there the results are rigged to
give people in less populated states more voting power.

Is our system "pure"?

Again - I'm not trying to argue that Trump didn't win the vote as our system is set up ... a "rigged" system.

 

Doubtful. Israeli liberals most likely aren't as emotional.

 

"May" being the important word in that sentence.

 

For that matter, how many people cast more then one vote in multiple precincts. Mike Smith in Oakland, John Smith in San Francisco, George Smith in Dale City, and if you hurry you can be Paul Smith in Alameda. Or some Precinct worker in Oakland casts her vote, and a vote for her sister, and votes for her deceased mother, father and great uncle.

 

"We would expect to find similar results among rightists and leftists in other cultures, including conservatives and liberals in the U.S., because of the cross-cultural similarities in the superstructure of ideology and the needs associated with rightist versus leftist ideology--and because of how these factors relate to emotional processes and their outcomes."

Sounds like they expect to find similar results regardless of nationality, which is the exact opposite of what you were arguing.

 

Good one... It would be even better if you actually believe Conservative heads are exploding... Is that really what you believe?

 

That's ridiculous but let's be fair.
67% of Clinton supporters think she won the election.

 

Only in this particular case, because Clinton lost. I've never heard liberals complain about it before.

People in less populated states don't have more voting power, clearly. California has 55 votes, Idaho gets 4 I think.

It is a clear balance between population, while protecting minority states rights.

Shouldn't liberals be all for supporting minority groups?

 

Wow, you weren't lying... This is effing hilarious!

 

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...cords-many-votes-detroits-precincts/95363314/

With things like this happening everywhere deceitful/corrupt DNC types run the show, no wonder people think that. California is dominated by tactical drones who would delight in this kind of activity. If Detroit had 37% more votes then cast, I can only imagine how bad it is here.

 

Corrupt, not trusted, disliked by Americans within the margin of error as Trump, dull, boring, perhaps even a lazy campaigner, tried to stay out of the spot light even. No interviews except by Oprah and the View. Trump made 117 campaign appearances since 1 Sep, Clinton made 71. Trump was in Wisconsin six times, Clinton never. Trump went to Michigan five times and held six or seven ralliers, two a day. Clinton went once.

The problem was the candidate herself. She was annotated as the Democratic nominee back in 2012 and she thought she was next in line for the presidency, the fact she would be the first woman president would be enough. The voters didn't buy it, especially the voters in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. She failed to address the fears of the middle class, the blue collar worker simply stating she would be Obama's third term. That's not addressing their fears and problems. That was promising more of the same.

 

Not as scary as the number of people who think he lost the election. Lololol

 

Wouldn't it have been great if the Russians hacked the DNC and Hillary Clinton and found out that they were not corrupt incompetent liars?

 

Exactly. And the sad thing is that folks have been reporting on these problems for some time now, yet people continue to game the system. We really need to get our act together...

Yes! Two questions should be front and center in the discussion on Russian hacking: how did they accomplish this (or more to the point, how do we prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future), and why is it that the hacked information would cause a change in who voters cast their vote for? Do those who are upset over the various things brought to light this election season honestly believe that the American voter would have been better off not knowing this information?

 

I bet there is a poll out there showing over 90% of Democrat voters think there is a national popular vote.

Now THAT'S scary!!

 

Why not be truthful and admit there is no national popular vote instead of sounding like Colbert and other idiots who claim here is such a vote?