Salt, wound. Wound, salt.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton finds herself on the wrong end of an electoral split, moving ahead in the popular vote but losing to President-elect Donald Trump in the Electoral College, according to the latest numbers emerging Wednesday. As of 10 a.m. ET, Clinton had amassed 59,299,381 votes nationally, to Trump's 59,135,740—a margin of 163,641 that puts Clinton on track to become the fifth U.S. presidential candidate to win the popular vote but lose the election.

Re-upping this post about the National Popular Vote.

George W. Bush won/stole the White House in 2000 despite losing the popular vote, and Bush would've lost the vote in the Electoral College if a partisan Supreme Court hadn't intervened to stop the vote counting. (Damn you, Bush v. Gore.) The NPVIC wasn't rolled out until 2007 but every blue state in the country should've instantly signed on to the NPVIC in the wake of George W. Bush's disastrous and un-small-D-democratic presidency. But so far only ten states and the District of Columbia have signed on. Washington state signed on in 2009 and California signed on in 2011. But no state has signed on since 2014. Shockingly absent from the list of states that have signed on to the NPVIC, the mechanism that would've prevented George W. Bush's election and could've spared us from having to worry about Donald J. Trump losing the popular vote but winning the White House: Oregon! The lucky pierre of blue states!

...

The Wall Street Journal condemns the NPVIC as "an urban power grab" that would result in "election efforts [that were] largely urban" and could even bring about "a multi-candidate, multiparty system instead of the two-party system we have."

Sign me up.

So there's that. For what it's worth. Which ain't much. Not this morning—and, hey: if you don't take the NYT out of the blue bag, will the news asphyxiate? Asking for a friend.