Donald Trump says that he would have probably won the popular vote as well as the electoral vote if illegals hadn’t voted.
To verify or refute that statement, one would have to know how many illegals voted. We’ve had some limited evidence that some illegals have indeed voted, but it’s been limited to accidental discoveries for the most part. There hasn’t been a nationwide concerted effort to quantify the votes cast by illegal aliens. So, in the end, we really don’t know how many illegals voted in the recent presidential election.
That makes President-elect Trump’s statement purely supposition – maybe he would have, maybe not – we’ll never know, so it’s a moot point.
But there is a point that Trump did make relative to the complaint being made by Hillary’s sore losers that more people voted for her since she won the popular vote – and by over 2 million voters.
They’re just trying to muddy the political waters by making it appear that Trump’s victory is somehow tainted since he didn’t win the popular vote, he only won that old “obsolete and decrepit” Electoral College vote and that if “one man, one vote” were the rule, the Wicked Witch of Chappaqua would have won.
As is common for the left, they make a one-sided argument and hope to convince shallow thinkers that, “she won the most votes, she should be the president,” in the hopes that they won’t accept Trump as a legitimate president – anything to tarnish him and Republicans is thought to be good for democrats and the left.
But, as usual, they leave out the fact that our presidential election system is specified by Article Two of the Constitution wherein citizens (not illegals) vote for a slate of electors pledged to a party’s candidate. It does not provide for a popular vote.
The states determine how those 538 electors are apportioned and all but two chose electors on a “winner take all” basis. The electors meet in December to cast their votes; that’s actually when the president is chosen. The electors are not required by law to support the candidate receiving the most votes in their state, but there have only been a few occasions when an elector voted contrary to his/her pledge.
While it’s true that the Electoral College is a throwback to the time of our country’s birth, it has served us well. The point is that the Electoral College is, unless and until it’s replaced, the way we choose a president. Those were the rules under which both campaigns, Hillary’s and Trump’s, were operating – until she lost. Now, the democrats would like to change the rules.
Think of it like a cross-country car race where contestant’s race from New York to Los Angeles with the team crossing the finish line in the least amount of time wins. Only after the race, a losing team complains that their team traveled the fewest miles and they deserve the prize, even though they arrived hours after the winner.
Trump’s point was that if the election were based on popular vote and NOT the Electoral College method, he would have campaigned differently.
Stop the presses!
If the president were chosen based on the popular vote, of course, the candidates would have concentrated on the largest cities – where the votes were. Who would have visited Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, the Dakotas, etc. when the best return on investment would be in the population centers – the big cities?
Of course, the “game” would have been played differently, we all know that. The left is just doing what they always do, trying to influence the slow-thinkers that there is something to their argument.
Anything to delegitimatize Trump’s election.
Anything to soften the realization that Hillary Clinton lost – again.