Yes, all the articles now say that Trump would have campaigned differently if he were pursuing a popular vote. They all forget to say that Clinton would have, too. It probably would have won her the electoral vote.
Speaking of reputable, Facebook and Google are now removing false news sites. Strange how they waited till the election was over. You would think they wouldn't want the election to be affected. Now that the false news would hurt Trump, not Clinton, they decide to make the change. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-goes-to-a-fake-news-site-with-false-numbers/
thats why i lost respect for obama almost immediately. his first run i bought into the transparency bullshit he was preaching. it didnt take long to realize he was just another politician. im sure trump will be the status quo soon. i just prefered a very slim chance over a criminal
I don't see why you expect any other result since it is easily possible. All you need to vote is to be registered to vote in Oregon. That is very easy to do, all you need to registrar is an acceptable ID. Acceptable ID includes the following: Valid photo identification, including driver's license. Paycheck stub with name and address. Utility bill with name and address. Bank statement with name and address. A government document with name and address. http://www.dmv.org/or-oregon/voter-registration.php
It's impossible to know which candidate would have won. Both would have campaigned differently, giving most of their attention to the major population centers and much less emphasis to the middle, less dense, part of the country. It would have been an entirely different election, so the fact that Clinton really-really won California's electoral votes, thereby giving her the most popular votes, is totally irrelevant.
You always say the obvious. Just like when anyone wants someone replaced in the Blazers. You always say, where's your list of replacements. This time I answered your article, so you disagreed with its message just to disagree with me. So, carrying on with new information instead of just taking up space saying the obvious: Today Clinton went over a million. She is now a million votes over Trump, and the margin is still rising as they count. I count on your telling me that this won't affect the outcome. Gee, I wouldn't know otherwise. Anyone with a lively creative brain knows that that isn't my point.
Calm down boys. I am just saying there are reports coming out. I want evidence than just this guys tweet from votefraud too. If it comes to light that this happened which hell, who knows it could have considering you don't have to show ID in some places to vote, I will post it here.
Here's your swamp. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/democrats-soros-trump-231313 George Soros and other rich liberals who spent tens of millions of dollars trying to elect Hillary Clinton are gathering in Washington for a three-day, closed door meeting to retool the big-money left to fight back against Donald Trump. The conference, which kicked off Sunday night at Washington’s pricey Mandarin Oriental hotel, is sponsored by the influential Democracy Alliance donor club, and will include appearances by leaders of most leading unions and liberal groups, as well as darlings of the left such as House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chairman Keith Ellison, according to an agenda and other documents obtained by POLITICO. Left wing democrats like Warren selling out to big money, billionaire donors.
