a) the rules of voting are clear, this is both the will of the people, and is also what the people are expected to accept as citizens. The time to denounce or change those rules is before your guy loses.
b) the popular vote is not the entire country, because not everyone voted. Not only do campaign strategies and other factors affect those numbers (to a degree that might make up the difference), but if you argue that people who didn't vote simply lost out, or don't count in deriving "the will of the people", then you could just as well argue that so did those who lost to the electoral college system.
When the union formed concessions were made... An Ohian's vote weighs, say 1.4, a californian 0.6. So depending on where you vote, your vote weighs more or less. I read Trump lost the popular vote by 3M. But then so did Bush.
I'm not American, my opinion is about as much worth as my passport.
When the union was formed, the big concession was the "three-fifths compromise": slaves counted for the purposes of vote apportioning, but weren't actually allowed to vote. Preservation of the racist institution of slavery was a driving force behind the unequal apportionment.
And California wasn't a state but a largely empty colony of Spain.
But didn't Hillary know it isn't the popular vote that gets her to presidency. The is no trophy for winning the popular vote! Why didn't she campaign in the Rust Belt states but went to California instead. It is really baffling...
> Why didn't she campaign in the Rust Belt states but went to California instead. It is really baffling...
Because, ironically, her campaign was convinced she had the election in the bag, and they didn't want to risk her losing the popular vote while winning the electoral college, because that could undermine her perceived "mandate".
She made a strategic mistake. But the "popular vote" keeps getting mentioned in the context which is validating her somehow. I see it more as another reminder of a big blunder she made not something positive to promote about her campaign.
a) the rules of voting are clear, this is both the will of the people, and is also what the people are expected to accept as citizens. The time to denounce or change those rules is before your guy loses.
b) the popular vote is not the entire country, because not everyone voted. Not only do campaign strategies and other factors affect those numbers (to a degree that might make up the difference), but if you argue that people who didn't vote simply lost out, or don't count in deriving "the will of the people", then you could just as well argue that so did those who lost to the electoral college system.