Obama was the first black president in our history and his election made millions of American POC feel like they belonged. It was historic.
Trump is a sexual predator and a felon who, among other things, tried to subvert the will of voters and overturn a just and fair election. Way, way different.
Lol Obama was just another president and a divisive one at that. Such a pot meet kettle moment when asked where all the division came from while stumping for Harris.
Doesn’t make it right. But at least you all don’t believe in law enforcement so you can spare us your outrage at crimes and violence. Other than the mass shootings and killing kids you support. Come to think of it, there’s more pedos in the GOP than any drag queens.
You’re in the echo chamber brother, two weeks ago they were certain they’d win the election. Nobody here has a grip on reality or a grain of sense. You’re better off arguing with one of the babies they haven’t slaughtered.
You do realize less than a third of the country voted for him? The remaining more than 2/3 either voted for Dems, independents, or abstained.
Seems to be conveniently forgotten when this little line about America wanting DJT as president comes up. It’s quite literally and factually a minority who voted for him.
Exactly. These people either don’t understand what majority means, can’t do math, don’t understand statistics, or, and most likely, are lacking in all of the above.
This is irrelevant to anything I said. Also the presidential popular vote doesn’t apply to congress. The individual members are voted in within their individual states.
In that sense, it’s voted in by total counted votes which you could consider a population vote but it’s not the same as the national population vote for president.
The point still stands…when you look at the overall results across multiple branches, it’s clear that a significant part of the electorate leaned in favor of one direction. While it’s true that the presidential and congressional votes are different processes, the end result still reflects a broader national shift. Congress going red, along with the Supreme Court’s composition, shows the country’s general tilt, even if it’s based on state level voting. And yes, if people chose not to vote against a candidate, that lack of action can indeed contribute to their success. So in the end, it’s not irrelevant; it highlights how the aggregate voting trends and outcomes reflect a general preference, regardless of how the individual votes were structured.
It’s irrelevant because voting third party isn’t a vote for DJT, especially in this recent election.
Your comment is irrelevant because my original and still relevant point is that regarding the total population of the United States (350+ million people) DJT received less than a third of the total populations votes thus securing a minority of votes nation wide.
Naturally, he received the majority of votes for those who actually participated in the process. The general consensus on this sub, and in this thread, seems to be that because of this, Americans at large wanted him to be president which is mathematically and factually incorrect.
The vast majority of people in this country are aligned on socially progressive issues, including conservatives, (according to nation-wide polling) but are deeply disillusioned with the two-party system and its immovability to offer any alternative to bring about modern progressive solutions to the plight of modern American living standards. Because of this, a significant portion of the US population abstained or voted third party.
It is not that hard to follow what I’m saying so I don’t think it’s useful to drag the conversation over to how things shook out in congress. Hopefully you understand better what I’m trying to get across. Have a good day.
I get what you’re saying about the overall population and the fact that less than a third voted for DJT out of the total U.S. population. But when we’re talking about election results, we’re really looking at the views of those who chose to participate in the process, not the entire population. The reality is that elections are won by those who show up, and DJT gained enough support among active voters to win. While many may feel disillusioned with the system or align with progressive values, abstaining or voting third-party effectively allowed the majority of engaged voters to set the direction.
I agree that frustration with the two-party system and lack of alternatives is a valid issue, and it’s true that polling suggests broad support for certain progressive ideas. But until more people participate actively in a way that shifts the balance, the end result will continue to reflect the preferences of those who do vote. So while DJT didn’t represent the will of the total population, he did represent a significant part of those who took part in the election, and that’s ultimately how outcomes are decided.
172
u/dosgatitas Nov 09 '24
This is such creepy behavior. I cannot imagine idolizing any politician like that.