Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Does Clinton's Popular Vote Victory Reduce Trump's Mandate?
YES. Trump's vote count is too low to be a mandate for sweeping change. 70 27.89%
NO. Trump won, and that's reason enough for a mandate for sweeping change. 125 49.80%
DOESN'T MATTER. The mandate concept is too vague to mean anything. 56 22.31%
Voters: 251. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:14 AM
 
10,512 posts, read 5,192,640 times
Reputation: 14056

Advertisements

Usually in elections it is said the a landslide victory is needed to serve as a mandate for huge, sweeping changes in laws and programs. Trump won in the Electoral College with a good margin but most would not call it a landslide. Hillary Clinton is winning the national popular vote by the largest margin in U.S. history:

Popular vote count Nov. 16 0800 PST

Clinton.... 62,414,099... 47.8%
Trump...... 61,255,290... 46.9%


Clinton lead = 1,158,809 (source: Cook Political Report)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:19 AM
 
12,772 posts, read 8,004,453 times
Reputation: 4332
More of this garbage that nobody cares about?

Neither Trump or Clinton managed to get more than ~25% of the vote from the American voting pool of eligible voters. Thats beyond sad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:21 AM
 
52,430 posts, read 26,740,150 times
Reputation: 21097
Clinton didn't win the popular vote.

They haven't finished counting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:24 AM
 
10,512 posts, read 5,192,640 times
Reputation: 14056
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Clinton didn't win the popular vote. They haven't finished counting.
Looking at the states with ballots left to count, there's zero chance Trump can close the gap. The only question remaining is how large will Clinton's popular vote margin be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:25 AM
 
Location: western East Roman Empire
9,427 posts, read 14,376,433 times
Reputation: 10191
Constitutionally it means nothing.

In any case, anything less than 50% is certainly not a popular mandate.

Bill Clinton won twice with less than 50% of the popular vote. The president and Congress passed some monumental legislation together.

Arguably Reagan was the last president with a popular mandate and his most momentous legislation was the change in the tax code.

Trump now has the power the enforce certain laws that the previous two presidents were lax about.

As for the rest, the so-called democrats have the power to filibuster in the Senate, no small power.

Checks and balances, then.

It's been working pretty well for some 225 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:25 AM
 
12,772 posts, read 8,004,453 times
Reputation: 4332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Looking at the states with ballots left to count, there's zero chance Trump can close the gap. The only question remaining is how large will Clinton's popular vote margin be.
The bigger question is what does she win? What do we as the American public win? Will Oprah tell us all to reach under our chairs to find keys to a new car? The excitement is too much!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:46 AM
 
10,512 posts, read 5,192,640 times
Reputation: 14056
Quote:
Originally Posted by bale002 View Post
Constitutionally it means nothing. In any case, anything less than 50% is certainly not a popular mandate.
Correct. Trump won by the thinnest of margins: Penn., Mich. and Wisc. were all won by a margin of 1.1% or narrower. The danger for Trump and the Republican majority in the Senate is if they overreach and push for massive changes; those states can easily flip and Trump becomes a one-term wonder. Ryan is floating the idea of a complete Medicare overhaul, that may be too much too far for the slim mandate that Trump has.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:57 AM
 
Location: Chicago Area
12,688 posts, read 6,760,826 times
Reputation: 6598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Usually in elections it is said the a landslide victory is needed to serve as a mandate for huge, sweeping changes in laws and programs. Trump won in the Electoral College with a good margin but most would not call it a landslide. Hillary Clinton is winning the national popular vote by the largest margin in U.S. history:

Popular vote count Nov. 16 0800 PST

Clinton.... 62,414,099... 47.8%
Trump...... 61,255,290... 46.9%


Clinton lead = 1,158,809 (source: Cook Political Report)
Honestly, only one vote even matters in answering your question. Donald Trump's vote. It is Donald Trump who must decide whether winning the EC but losing the popular vote will result in him doing less than he had originally intended to or changing things up.

If Trump is okay with diving in and doing everything he promised to do, then it's up to the Republican controlled Congress to either work with him or not to work with him.

Truth be told, we haven't seen a true landslide victory since 1988 when George Bush Sr absolutely crushed Michael Dukakis. Everything since and most everything before Nixon were at least closely contested. I don't think it's logical that you need an overwhelming mandate in order to do your job as President. If it really was a prerequisite, then most US presidents couldn't have ever done much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 10:04 AM
 
Location: West Texas
2,366 posts, read 1,652,895 times
Reputation: 2561
Make that:

Trump 64,255,290
Clinton 62,414,099

Vote Fraud Monitoring Group Says Three Million Noncitizens Voted in Presidential Election
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Amongst the AZ Cactus
7,068 posts, read 6,494,116 times
Reputation: 7730
Sigh....again and again as mentioned, if an election was based on a popular vote, a different campaign strategy would have been practiced by those running.

She lost and the dems lost control/any hope of control over congress. republicans control it all. That's the mandate. They have lots of control now.

Will the river of denial ever end for the left?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top