Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by drcode 1428 days ago
This is equivalent to people who argue "President X didn't REALLY win because they didn't win the popular vote"

Such an argument ignores the fact that president X would likely have changed their strategy if the determinant for winning the election was changed to winning the popular vote

2 comments

What you're saying might be true (I'd take a bet against Rs suddenly winning the popular vote if the game changed, though) but it could also true that we're playing the wrong game.
Oh don't get me wrong, the system we've settled on isn't great
I'm not sure this makes sense since X is a populist.
Except according to wikipedia "populist" doesn't refer to "popular vote", it refers to the idea of "the people vs the elites".

>Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of the people and often juxtapose this group against the elite.