Quite a few people (principally, those who simply will never accept the results of the 2016 presidential election) have pointed out--somewhat gratuitously--that Hillary Clinton actually won the popular vote. (Presumably, there are very few Americans who are unaware of this fact.) Of course, this is not how we elect our presidents. And it never has been. If it were, Donald Trump would have surely campaigned differently. Anyway, here are the final results: Nationwide: Hillary Clinton: 65,844,610 votes Donald Trump: 62,979,636 votes Difference: 2,864,974 votes But now, please, just look at California's totals: Hillary Clinton: 8,753,788 votes Donald Trump: 4,483,810 votes Difference: 4,269,978 votes Without California, therefore, Donald Trump would have won the popular vote by 1,405,004 votes. So liberals are actually saying that they wish that California (just by itself) could decide the election. Never mind that there is a growing movement for California to secede from the United States...
A left-wing member yesterday said "its the President of the United States of America. Not the president of the Battleground States". He should be happy to learn Trump won not only more states than Hillary, but also more total votes when adding up 49 out of the 50 states in the country. But, of course, he's not. Apparently California, home to 33% of the nation's welfare recipients and half of its illegal aliens, needs to decide who the President is in this big country of ours.
A nightmare would be Ca. picking our future presidents. We do not need Mexico to select our future presidents. And Ca is turning into Mexico which is very appealing to the rich elites who live in Ca. Being surrounded by cheap labor is good for our rich elites. I once visited Ca and spent some time in 4 rich elite households. These people had servants. All illegal Mexicans. Ok, one had a nanny to raise their child, from Europe, here legally. But you see few Europeans as servants for the rich in Ca. So, I would rather a state like Ca or New York NOT choose the president for ALL of the People. The people have been screwed over enough with the current electoral system. We cannot handle a worse screwing. Just to make safe space modern liberals satisfied.
1/3 of Californians weren't even born in America. 2/3 of Californians are either low information or just really stupid. 53% of all adults in Los Angeles County are illiterate. I (*)(*)(*)(*) you not and they vote and vote the Democrat ticket every time. But it's just not L.A. and California but every large city in America where Hillary won has a large number of illiterate voters. -> http://www.colorlines.com/content/more-third-adults-are-illiterate-many-cities-what-do-we-do
So what? Why does that matter? If anything this is just saying that you fear losing power. But why? They have more people, they have millions. Isn't denying California a voice in effect saying you don't believe in democracy? The only way to justify your position it to push for minority rights.
Better to be governed by a minority of sane persons than a majority of totally clueless surfer dudes and transgendered bartenders. - lemmiwinx/dec 2016/
In reality, California is too large a state. California politics is controlled by the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco. In this past election, many don't realize that 25 of California's counties -- most notably those in the north-east part of the state -- gave the win to Donald Trump. I submit to you that these people are not well represented as "Californians" because they get lumped in with the loonies in Hollywood. The state of California should be broken up in order to better reflect the reality of the demographics... Reasonable people understand this. Unfortunately, according to the mainstream press, reasonable people in California are few and far between... Agreed. People love to point out that Clinton won the popular vote, but before I accept that statement, I'd want to take a closer look at the California vote to determine how many illegals voted for Clinton, how many dead people voted for Clinton, and how many people voted multiple times for Clinton. Until that information is made available, the CA vote should remain suspect.
Hillary's "majority" of voters is irrelevant. Everyone knows many of her supporters are a basket of deportables.
Your OP makes no sense at all. It's called the NPV because it is all 50 states plus DC together. Or did you somehow miss this easy to comprehend point? Hillary Clinton won in the NPV by +2.09%, or +2.8 million raw-votes. WHERE they came from is irrelevant. But that is all window dressing. As we all know, the electoral vote decides, and Trump won in the EV. So, exactly what is your point, other than to troll?
Having CA vote in a presidential election is similar to having a foreign country manipulate the election. Obama invited Mexico to manipulate the USA election when he called upon illegal Mexican immigrants to illegally vote for Hillary. The number of electors for CA should be reduced by whatever percentage of CA population is made up of illegal immigrants. If 20% of CA is illegal immigrants, reduce the electors by 20%.
Hillary Clinton should run for governor of California? She could pretend she's president of her own little country.
What is amazing is that people who live here, and have been educated (hopefully) here, still do not understand the process of electing a president. You vote to select the Electorate for your STATE. The mantra of 'Popular vote' is misleading and only comes up when someone has their shorts in a bind because they lost. People need to grow up, go back to school and learn a few things about how stuff works. This national tantrum is getting tiresome.
Illegal aliens are counted in the census when appointing congressional districts. Right now using the low estimate on how many illegals are sucking off the taxpayers in California, California has six congressional districts that actually belong to some other states. It's likely more than six.
in california it is that so many people live in three spots..san francisco area..los angeles and san diego areas...the rest have the state overwhelmingly voted more for trump than clinton...but too many druggies and poor people live in those three areas..
LOL ... you do realize there's an opioid epidemic in rural (RED) Murica, right? And many of those schmoes aren't exactly toolin' around in Ferraris, eh...
ever been to the bay area?..druggies and homeless everywhere...yes in the rural areas should we have a few druggies around but not many homeless and very little crime..but in the big cities crime is everywhere
Consider most Californians are independent voters. There are political bosses of both parties here. And they are in the San Francisco Bay Area. Although the population is heavily weighted in the South, most governors and senators are Bay Area politics. And should a Southern Californian be elected Governor such as Ex-San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson or The Arnold, they are snubbed as the Democratic Party snubbed President Jimmy Carter. Southern California has no political organization as the Bay Area GOP and Democrats do. What bothers Moi is the disenfranchisement of the California voter. Presidential primaries are after a candidate has secured the nomination. The winner take all Presidential election nullifies a mass of voters that is larger than the total votes cast in many States. I looked it up 4 years ago and found more voters voted for Romney than the total votes cast in several States. I would wish the elector would be decided by the Presidential winner in each Congressional District and two electors as winner take all. The winner take all scheme plainly disenfranchises many voters. California has just gotten too populous since winner take all was implemented. Moi Support Calexit http://www.yescalifornia.org/ r > g Moi is on to YOU!
really?..better get new glasses then..ever been down by union square in san francisco?..market street from 3rd to van ness?..mission street?..fishermans wharf...san jose isn't much better
. This is for you California. Some will like it . Some will not. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyEXshBOwEU .
This is so true and a lot of those votes in California are from the 15 million Latino's that live there and 68% of them disagree with Trump's wall. Without California and Latino's Hillary failed miserably on every level.
Yeah, not so bad here in the south bay, but take a ride up to the city and you'll know exactly what's being described.
