I don't know what else you call it when you get supreme executive power despite a majority of the voters not wanting you to have it. I'm aware that it wasn't illegal, but it doesn't mean it's legitimate.
> I'm aware that it wasn't illegal, but it doesn't mean it's legitimate.
Mind you, I'm no Trump fan, but "legal" is literally the only relevant definition of legitimacy in this context.
If the process by which Trump was elected was illegitimate, then the process by which all American Presidents have been elected is illegitimate. Americans have had two centuries to change the electoral college, and have not done so, because clearly voters have no problems with it when it benefits their side. Neither the presence nor the absence of a majority vote is, or has ever been, relevant.
We went though this with Obama, and a not-insignificant segment of the population believing him to be illegitimate. Before Obama, people on the left thought George W. Bush stole the election because of the debacle that was Florida.
It's a poisonous precedent to set, particularly in the radicalized atmosphere we find ourselves in, not to recognize the legitimacy of a government just because the "wrong" candidate won under the rules. How many more of these "illegitimate" Presidents are we going to go through before the losing side just decides to start shooting?
I hate Trump as much as any reasonable person, but Americans got exactly what they wanted, and deserved, with him.
Ask yourself who those other votes went for; who do you think they would most likely vote for in the runoff?
I'm a fan of instant-runoffs. That would dramatically change the political landscape.