Monday, December 19, 2016

It's Official: Clinton's Popular Vote Win Came Entirely From California

This was written by John Merline and is from Investor's Daily.


Democrats who are having trouble getting out of the first stage of grief — denial — aren't being helped by the fact that, now that all the votes are counted, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote has topped 2.8 million, giving her a 48% share of the vote compared with Trumps 46%.

To those unschooled in how the United States selects presidents, this seems totally unfair. But look more closely at the numbers and you see that Clinton's advantage all but disappears.

As we noted in this space earlier, while Clinton's overall margin looks large and impressive, it is due to Clinton's huge margin of victory in one state — California — where she got a whopping 4.3 million more votes than Trump.

California is the only state, in fact, where Clinton's margin of victory was bigger than President Obama's in 2012 — 61.5% vs. Obama's 60%.

But California is the exception that proves the true genius of the Electoral College — which was designed to prevent regional candidates from dominating national elections.

In recent years, California has been turning into what amounts to a one-party state. Between 2008 and 2016, the number of Californian's who registered as Democrats climbed by 1.1 million, while the number of registered Republicans dropped by almost 400,000.

What's more, many Republicans in the state had nobody to vote for in November.

There were two Democrats — and zero Republicans — running to replace Sen. Barbara Boxer. There were no Republicans on the ballot for House seats in nine of California's congressional districts.

At the state level, six districts had no Republicans running for the state senate, and 16 districts had no Republicans running for state assembly seats.

Plus, since Republicans knew Clinton was going to win the state — and its entire 55 electoral votes — casting a ballot for Trump was virtually meaningless, since no matter what her margin of victory, Clinton was getting all 55 votes.

Is it any wonder then, that Trump got 11% fewer California votes than John McCain did in 2008? (Clinton got 6% more votes than Obama did eight years ago, but the number of registered Democrats in the state climbed by 13% over those years.)

If you take California out of the popular vote equation, then Trump wins the rest of the country by 1.4 million votes. And if California voted like every other Democratic state — where Clinton averaged 53.5% wins — Clinton and Trump end up in a virtual popular vote tie. (This was not the case in 2012. Obama beat Romney by 2 million votes that year, not counting California.)

Meanwhile, if you look at every other measure, Trump was the clear and decisive winner in this election.

7 comments:

insanitybytes2 said...


Every time I see all that red poured across the map, all I can think is, "the Russians are coming, the Russians are coming." It's like a giant red scare all over again. :)

Anonymous said...

If one watches the mainstream media, news, day-time talk shows, the political pundit bobble-heads, movies, music videos, and such, it's very easy for one to get the impression that America is solid blue - from coast-to-coast, but in reality it isn't. This voting map for every national election has shown this trend for decades I think, and it gives me hope for America.

Night Wind said...

Trump should demand a recount in California so we can see how much cheating the Clintons did there.

Earl Thomas said...

'If one watches the mainstream media, news, day-time talk shows, the political pundit bobble-heads, movies, music videos, and such, it's very easy for one to get the impression that America is solid blue - from coast-to-coast'

Usually they are located in California or New York...and given their lack of what it is like outside their bubbles, they probably think everyone else is the same way.

And even then it's the big cities in those states. Upstate NY and the rural areas of CA are usually red.

Anonymous said...

Earl Thomas said...

Usually they are located in California or New York...and given their lack of what it is like outside their bubbles, they probably think everyone else is the same way.



It's the same in the UK with London based journalists. They all think that 'London is the future' or 'London is normal' and racist whites live everywhere else. They particularly hate the working class though.

Earl Thomas said...

That's not surprising. London and NYC have a lot of similarities...they think they are the center of the universe and everyone else is inferior.

Joshua Sinistar said...

If 2+2=4, then there's serious voter fraud here. The idea that all those islands of blue and coasts are so densely populated they actually outnumber over 90% of the geographic United States is ludicrous. Most of the red states are suburban, not vast ranches like the Ponderosa with one family living there. When you factor out the illegal invaders and the dead, I imagine what we have is more of an 80-20 split. I reckon that probably only 18-19% of America is actually in the blue column. Its actually a lunatic fringe. Leftists are just a motley crew of degenerates, criminals, the insane, substance abusers and profligates of various dysfunctions. The working class and self-sufficient avoid these losers like the plague. The "experts" are mostly fake degreed professors of Marxism and White Hatred. They'll talk equality all day, until they angrily attack "White Trash". Like the people who built and designed everything that allows their lazy ass to live.