Despite losing Tuesday’s presidential election, Hillary Clinton appears to be on pace to win the popular vote, an ironic twist in an election in which her opponent repeatedly said the system was rigged against him.

Just two days before Election Day, Republican businessman Donald Trump tweeted: “The Electoral College is a disaster for a democracy.”

As it turns out, without the Electoral College, Trump probably wouldn’t be the president-elect.

A day after Election Day, Clinton held a narrow lead in the popular vote, according to unofficial results tallied by The Associated Press. With nearly 125 million votes counted, Clinton had 47.7 percent of the vote and Trump had 47.5 percent.

That’s a lead of about 236,000 votes.

Many states count votes after Election Day, so Clinton isn’t guaranteed to keep her lead. However, most of the outstanding votes appear to be in Democratic-leaning states, making it very likely she will become the second Democratic candidate for president this century to win the popular vote but lose the presidency.

Oh the irony!  Perhaps Donald Trump will now have an opportunity to grow up.

This is twice that the electoral college has deprived the real winner of the presidency.  Al Gore and Hillary Clinton.

Perhaps it’s time to change the Constitution so there is no electoral college.


The biggest chunk of uncounted votes is in California. Washington State, New York, Oregon and Maryland also have large numbers of uncounted votes. Clinton won all those states, and if the trends continue, she will pad her lead by more than 1 million votes.

30 Thoughts to “Did Hillary win the popular vote? Oh the irony!!!”

  1. Steve Thomas

    I see you are transitioning from shock to anger in the 5 stages of grief. Trying to deny the reality of it, trying to bend reality to something easier to accept.

    The winner if the electoral college is the winner of the presidency. Accepting the truth of it will help you cope. Trust me. When Obama was elected and then reelected, I had similar pain.

    The thing is, Trump isn’t hostile to reproductive rights, as far as I can tell, and I doubt anyone is going to try to limit them further. Roe v. Wade won’t be overturned. Eliminating the electoral college is a pipe-dream.

    1. Punishing women who have had abortions is hostility, in my mind, especially when women have a constitutional right to abortion. I didn’t make this up. I heard it from his own mouth, in response to Chris Matthews.

    2. Forget the transitioning part. I am in shock, I am angry and I am in grief. No transition. I am all three and will remain there.

  2. George Ha rris

    Has Thomas forgotten that Trump said women should be punished for abortions? And to think that Republicans won’ continue to peck away at Roe v. Wade is living in la-la-land-again. Steve, have you been at the recreational weed again?

    1. George, you and I both know what Trump said. You and I have both watched Roe v. Wade whittled away at. We both know that access to abortion rights has become more and more difficult.

      Steve wants to deny this very basic fact.

      1. Steve Thomas


        Oh, I won’t deny the fact that since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, concluding that some unwritten right to unrestricted abortion existed in the US Constitution when ratified in 1789, there has been a systematic effort to chip-away at it, to infringe upon it, in much the same way as those opposed to an actual enumerated right, the 2nd Amendment, have done the same. The 1934 firearms act, which was struck down in 1967, and replaced by the 1968 act.

        I am not denying the last three decades, those opposed to abortion have made progress in restricting it, mostly at the state level, some upheld by the SCOTUS, some struck down. A similar effort has been made at the state level regarding the 2A, with similar results from SCOTUS.

        These are undeniable facts. What I am arguing is one off-the-cuff statement from someone who has a history of off-the-cuff statements doesn’t wipe away a whole bunch of previous public statements of support for the “right to choose”.

        But I understand your concerns. Like me, you understand that short of unconstitutional executive action, the President can’t unilaterally restrict abortion rights anymore than they can gun rights, but they can through the regulatory process. Seen it myself regarding Obama and the 2A, (Banning types of cheap ammo, banning the importation of certain firearms that have legal US-made counterparts). Trump might engage in the same unconstitutional action.

        And like you, I know that it’s the SCOTUS that will ultimately decide, and Trump may appoint up to 3 justices in the coming years. A conservative replacement for Scalia will tip the court away from its current 4-4 right-left balance, but not dramatically. With a Republican-controlled senate, this nominee will get approved, but not after some attempts by Schumer to filibuster. Ginsberg is literally dying and is expected to retire shortly. The likelihood of her hanging on for 4 more years pretty slim, but she might hold on to after the mid-terms, and a change in Senate control would force Trump to appoint a more moderate replacement.

        These are the facts. Believe me, I know how you feel. That knot in your stomach knowing that there’s a freight-train coming at your most cherished individual liberties, and there’s little to do to stop it, especially when your favored party doesn’t control any branch of government. Relying on the opposing party’s goodwill and respect for the US Constitution is thin gruel on which to subsist. Been there. 2008. Sucks. That feeling that others couldn’t give a crap about your individual liberty, especially someone who is supposed to be your president. Been there too, these last 8 years. Sucks.

        But I highly doubt that restricting “reproductive rights” is high on Trump’s list, nor is it on the list of his core supporters. They want to see economic growth, an end to unchecked illegal immigration, reduction of the regulatory state, staying out of foreign conflicts and they want to feel safe from external threats, especially radical Islamists. His plate will be pretty full, and he knows people will reelect him based on his performance in these areas. As far as I can tell, he only made that one statement regarding abortion, and quickly walked it back. Hillary, on the other hand, had a record of supporting anti-gun legislation, and a long history of anti-gun statements.

        No denial of “basic facts” here. Just a rational interpretation of facts. Yes, your rights are in potential jeopardy, and you need to remain vigilant. But you know the threat isn’t likely to come from the Oval office. It will come from the states. Some state restriction, winding its way through the legal challenge process, to be ultimately decided at SCOTUS. At least you should gain small comfort from the fact that conservative justices have a tendency not to overturn previous decisions. Liberal/Activist justices would.

        If Trump had made a statement such as “I am in favor of an abortion law similar to that of Poland” I would put your concerns on par with mine regarding the 2A. Hillary did say she favored an “Australian-style gun-control” scheme, and she said it more than once, without walking it back. But she lost, and I can breathe easier.

      2. I expect the anti abortion folks will hold Trump’s feet to the fire. Hopefully the women in his life will hold more sway and will convince him that women can make their own morally appropriate decisions without the aid of government. However, I don’t put much stock in his being convinced because the issue is so politicized.

        Will Planned Parenthood be defunded? I expect so. That organization is at the heart of reproductive rights. I am sure Mike Pence will throw in his two cents worth also.

        Reproductive Rights are just one of my concerns. When one has a full plate of concerns, its difficult to prioritize.

      3. Steve Thomas


        My hope for the New GOP (Trump’s GOP) is that they tackle the “Big Rock” issues facing us right now, and leave the social issue fights…especially those already decided (Abortion. Gay Marriage) to Stare Decisis, and the remaining social issues to the states, and the people, per the 10th Amendment.

      4. I would like to see Obamacare fixed. It has many good components that are needed by people.

      5. Death by a thousand duck bites? What was that you said?

      6. Steve Thomas


        Being pecked to death by a duck.

      7. Somehow I knew duck lips were involved.

    2. George, apparently you and I aren’t the only ones who have noticed that Trump’s feet will be held to the fire on this issue.

    3. Steve Thomas

      @George Ha rris

      Trump was pro-choice for most of his public life. This is a matter of public record. When someone makes a policy statement during an election that completely contradicts their long public life, I tend to dismiss it. Sorta like when Hillary said she supports the 2nd Amendment. But unlike Trump, Clinton has a long history if supporting legislation hostile to the 2nd amendment. I base my opinion on actions, not a few words that were quickly walked back.

      As far as your lame attempt to falsely associate me with use illicit substances, I will give you a pass. You are likely in the depths of sorrow and anger. I’ve been there. 2008 and 2012.

  3. Starryflights

    I am heartened to hear that more Americans voted against Trump than for him. There is certainly a solid base from which to rebuild.

    1. kelly_3406


      If one eliminates votes by illegal aliens and ex-cons, I am not sure Hillary’s lead would hold.

      Plus the Republican vote in California is likely suppressed because a Republican probably could not be elected as a dog catcher there.

      1. No one has ever explained to me why they feel that an “ex-con” shouldn’t be allowed to vote after time has been served.

        I also don’t think very many illegal aliens vote. Most don’t want that kind of visibility. Non-citizens have no business voting. People who have completed serving time should be treated just like everyone else. That is a false discrimination!

      2. kelly_3406


        I think quite a few illegal aliens voted. They were motivated to try to keep Trump from winning.

        Felony disenfranchisement has been found to be constitutional. Voting is one of the most important responsibilities of citizenship.

        Do you really think someone who has been convicted of a violent crime or for drug dealing should be allowed to vote?

        You can bet that McAuliffe would not have worked so hard to re-establish felon voting rights if he was not certain that the vast majority would vote for Hillary.

      3. Why do you think that Bob McDonnell worked hard to restore felony rights when he was governor? You seem to be forgetting his efforts. Plenty of things have been Constitutional–segregated schools, ban on same-sex marriage, banning birth control and inter-racial marriage. That doesn’t make things right.

        Absolutely I think that someone convicted of a violent crime or drug charges should be allowed to vote once their sentence has been served. Give me a good reason why they shouldn’t be treated like everyone else once they have repaid their “debt to society.?”

        Do you have any proof at all that illegal aliens voted or is this just a “feeling?”

      4. George S. Harris


        Provide the proof Kelly-voter fraud is infinitesimal.

      5. Starryflights

        @George S. Harris

        She has no proof. Kelly is a liar.

      6. Kelly_3406


        Potential voter registrants are required only to self-verify their citizenship without any government verification. The Public Interest Legal Foundation found over 1000 non-citizens registered to vote in 8 Virginia counties (the only 8 counties for which it could obtain records).

        Given that there is no verification of US citizenship in other states with huge illegal alien populations, it is not difficult to statistically extrapolate that there is a huge number of non-citizens registered to vote.

        Starry likes to call anyone a liar that he disagrees with. He should try not to be such a sore loser.

      7. It should be like getting your drivers license. Registration should be more difficult than simply going and voting. On the other hand, I do no think that illegal aliens vote. There are lots of people who are here legally but who aren’t citizens. They shouldn’t be voting in federal elections either. Its up to towns and local jurisdictions who they allow to vote.

      8. Starryflights


        If It’s “not difficult” to extrapolate, then why don’t you tell me how many illegals voted? Please provide your statistical calculations to support your conclusion.

        As as Moon stated,there are differences between non-citizens and illegal aliens. Lawful immigrants aren’t supposed to vote until they become citizens. And if they did vote, I wouldn’t assume that they vote democratic. State and local jurisdictions are responsible for ensuring they are citizens.

        Perhaps you’re not a liar. Perhaps you’re just stupid.

      9. Kelly_3406


        You are in denial, my friend.

        D’s like to deny that something can be true unless there is absolute proof. Anyone who dares to call out something as corrupt or unfair without absolute proof is called a liar or stupid.

        The best example of this was the rigged nomination of Hillary Clinton. Despite an obvious stacking of the deck in Hillary’s favor, anyone who suggested that the nomination process was unfair was dismissed because there was no absolute proof of foul play. Bernie and his supporters were treated as complete fools by the DNC. By the time the Wikileaks revelations came out, it was too late to do anything about it–Hillary had “won”.

        Well, there is plenty of evidence that illegal immigrants are voting and that corrupt/inept officials are not doing anything about it. We know that many of the large metropolitan areas in the US are sanctuary cities in which many rights and privileges are given to illegal aliens. We saw from the election that democratic operatives close to Hillary Clinton were willing to commit voter fraud (re: Robert Creamer). And we learned that a rather large number of non-citizens were registered in Virginia. Taken together, it is not a stretch to conclude that a large number of non-citizens are voting in US elections.

        Plus, a study by two professors at Old Dominion found that 6.4% of non-citizens in the US voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election.

        If you want to delude yourself into thinking that illegal aliens cannot affect US elections, you go right ahead. As we saw in the rigged nomination of Hillary Clinton, delusion plays a large role in progressive politics.

      10. I doubt if there are more Democratic voter frauds than Republican. Its all supposition now.

        There was no rigged nomination of Hillary Clinton. Please don’t pick up the Bernie whining mantra.

  4. George S. Harris

    Am not certain Trump will be able to pack the SCOTUS since he does not have a “fool proof” majority in the Senate R-52, D-46 I-2. He surely will try. And as to bringing jobs back? AYSM? He may get us to withdraw from NAFTA but he doesn’t have the power or authority to renegotiate it on his own. And yes he may slap huge tariffs on countries like China but what a sure way to start a trade war that will bring down all economies. His threat to defund Planned Parenthood-he will have to get around Paul Ryan and the same with deporting 11 million immigrants-Ryan is in favor of some path to citizenship. Trump said Ryan wouldn’t be the Speaker of the House, which just shows you how little Trump knows about how politics work in Congress.

    What you should really be concerned about is his absolute power to launch a nuclear weapon-there is no failsafe unless those ordered to launch a weapon mutiny.

    1. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. You have made some excellent points, George.

Comments are closed.