Many are going to regret their vote for Trump

How many times are we going to have to explain the system?

The electoral college was put in place for a very good reason, and without it, even more people would not be bothered to vote.

The problem was not the electoral college; it was a complete lack of faith in the DNC and their candidate's eligibility.

A protest vote against her corruption and elitism.

She would have lost to Phyllis Diller, in reality.

Once again you avoid the question. Do you consider your state, county, town or city to be ruled by the "mob"?

You're right, of course. More evidence.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pew-chief-trumps-right-to-claim-electoral-mandate-diss-popular-vote/article/2610160?custom_click=rss

Trump is a "responder" not a strategist. He had no idea in hell that he would in. He was almost seprate from his campaign and was always being "mopped up" after.

This is all revisionist bullshit. Hillary lost it, Trump didnt win it.

I've been saying this from the get-go.

Trump's claim that HRC campaigned in the "wrong states" is a half-truth, for mine; she avoided the states where her electorate wanted straight answers to straight questions.

She would have been told by her team that it wouldn't matter, if she ignored those states.

Bad intel, once again.

Through my superior intellect.

Your grasp of history is frightening.

Intra state votes are a direct vote because the results only affect the inhabitants of that state and things being closer to the grass roots give those inhabitants more direct and immediate recourse in the event of Malfeasance.

A national direct vote could have negative affect on a smaller state and there would never be any recourse...Hence mob rule. This is 8th grade civics...Can liberals be that ignorant or maybe just plain dumb?

You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who agrees more that Hillary lost it.

She lost it, she lost it, she lost it.

She really lost it.

I heard talking heads say Trump was running the last swing of the campaign with the EC foremost in view. Clinton blew off a few key states completely.

I see that Builder says she may have blown them off because there was no way she could win them.

I'd cite this article as well. https://www.google.com/amp/amp.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/17/report_neglect_and_poor_strategy_helped_cost_clinton_three_critical_states.html?client=safari

No, Trump has many strategies and he won the election against all odds.

HRC being the lying nasty corrupt woman with blood on her hands that she is, well that didn't help her.

0bama injected his failed legacy into HRC's campaign, and that was pretty much the kiss of death for her.

Yeah, I think Trump did begin to see the finish line, and changed tack a few times.

I also believe that he was in the seat initially, because HRC and her backers thought it would be an easy win for her. Until all the mud started flying.

I feel strongly (after reading emails that prove it) that the Clinton camp did manipulate events to elevate Trump to the GOP nomination, as you say.

I don't think he expected to be the nominee, and he scrambled for the win when he thought it was within his reach.

Yes, he's ego-driven. He still looked shell-shocked on the day, though.

I must admit that most Australians were as well. But I definitely heard Harlan Hill stating that the DNC instructed her to support Trump's candidacy, if only for financial reasons.

Trump was not the voters' choice. We intend to spebd the time until he is impeached snd removed from office reminding him that the country didn't want him.#

How many timed do we have to eccxplain the system to you? The EC was put in place as parft of th ed political horse trading that w as s the Constjitutionall Convention as a sop to the smaller less populous (and slave holding) states to counter the more populous states. It was obsolete a century and a half ago. Ther is no valid reason somebody in montana as hould have twice the voting power for the one office for ALL OF US that i do. ONE PERSON ONE VOTE. That'S what zSCOTUS Zsays, NOT One Person Two Votes

And your grasp of history is nonexistent.

Hmmm, is English your second language?

The electoral college vote is every bit as valid today as it was at inception. I'd be more concerned that people like Michael Moore were offering bribes of sorts (pay your get out of jail free card) to buy votes in the electoral college retrospectively.

Isn't that perverting the course of democracy?

And nobody ever mentioned Rupert Murdoch (expat Australian) influencing election results through media saturation for over three decades.

Thanks for the review. But I was asking Frug because I doubt he understands his own posts. His statement was that democracy is "mob rule" and my objective was to show he is wrong.
If there was only a popular vote for president, it wouldn't give any advantage or disadvantage to any state, because the state you are from wouldn't have any bearing on your vote. You would either vote for one candidate or the other. How would the population of your state have any effect at all?
The only time the population of your state would have an effect is when the states are voting, as in a vote for a Constitutional amendment.

I'm surprised I need to explain it.
Would the people of New Hampshire ever see a candidate campaign in their state or address those concerns unique to the inhabitants or assist the down ballot candidates? What incentive would they have to even show up to the polls?

Right. That's why the candidates spend so much time campaigning in Vermont and Wyoming, for the vast advantage those EC votes get for them.