Both parties need to learn that if you lose it’s because you didn’t get enough votes and to reflect on why that is. Although I’m sure it’s a lot more fun to complain about how you were cheated.
She raised specific complaints regarding the process, but never suggested that they invalidated the results.
She proclaims the election was stolen.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trum...
> The investigation by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III concluded that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election “in sweeping and systematic fashion” with the goal of helping Trump and harming Clinton
> You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019...
This one also references the Mueller Report.
What you're saying is only true in a dream world where gerrymandering, closing polling places, and preventing access to ballot boxes (in-person or otherwise) isn't happening. Unfortunately this isn't the case. So, no, you are wrong.
It’s a serious problem for all citizens, but republicans are incentivized to keep doing it.
Large scale change is supposed to require multiple types of majority, not just a snap mob decision. That’s a feature, not a bug.
You make it sound like the number of states has always been the same, and cannot change. In reality, Congress gets to decide which states to add (and which potential states to deny), and it does so with deliberate consideration of how the electoral votes would be affected.
One could even argue that states gerrymander their own electoral vote by choosing to give all their electors to the plurality winner within their state, when they could choose to assign electors proportionally instead. They don't literally draw up per-elector districts to produce this skewed result, but the result is the same as a very skilled after-the-fact gerrymander, so I think it's a reasonable comparison.
Anyway, I wasn't just talking about gerrymandering at the Presidential level. The problem exists in the individual state legislatures too (although it's hard to calculate an average across different states), and in Congress. For example, an interesting analysis[0] from 2016 found that:
> In the past four congressional elections, then, Republicans, as the party with the majority in the House, received a “seats bonus,” wherein members of their party secured a larger share of the seats in the chamber than the share of votes won nationwide.
[0] https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2016/11/22/gop-seats-b...
Millions of votes of a difference and complete capture of many states. My vote, living in Massachusetts, has no value in the presidential election because there’s a 100% chance it’ll be blue.
It is a flaw. Republican votes in California count for much less than Democratic votes in Wyoming. It's a national election, the counting should be done nationally. We did away with states voting for Senators, it's time to do the same for President.
Not all voters are equal, but if people dont like you, you won't win
Does that sentence not completely contradict itself?
How often in modern times has a Republican president won a majority of the popular vote? Seems like the will of the people is not consistently respected, and even if people like you then you may very well lose. Especially if the people that like you are urban voters.
Also, Hillary Clinton wasn't entirely wrong. That there was Russian interference in both the 2016 and 2020 elections on behalf of Trump's campaign is a fact - only the effect of that interference in the first case and the degree of Trump's foreknowledge are in dispute. Meanwhile, there was no actual conspiracy to steal the election from Trump... that was entirely bullshit. Like Hillary Clinton's weird brain disease. And Hillary Clinton's kill count. And Hillary Clinton's pedophile sex slave ring. And all of the Benghazi hearings. And whatever "treason" was supposed to be in the DNC email leaks. And Joe Biden being a pedophile. And Joe Biden having crippling dementia. And whatever Hunter Biden's briefcase was supposed to be about. And whatever the bullshit sandwich du jour for 2024 turns out to be.
He's a private citizen now, so his tweet equivalents and lawsuits don't matter
It's the false equivalence I'm objecting to. It seems clear to me that one side went off the deep end further than the other in this case.