He's not saying he could have won California, he's saying he could have won more voters there per rally or per dollar spent, but that it was pointless to go there because the state was lost. And he's right. Don't get caught up in the magical thinking that it's all about the way the electoral process is structured. Maybe it matters, but it might not and Democrats need to accept the fact that we need to work harder and smarter to convince voters that we really are the better choice. We are the better choice but there's a whole lot of bullshit we have to fight through to make our case effectively. God knows how many more votes he could have cadged off fools in places like Orange County.
Is there a meaningful difference between 1 vote and 2 million, in this case?

Our politicians have spoken: There won't be any contesting of the election via the political process. No one is willing to risk a constitutional crisis. Clinton has already conceded. Faithless Electors is a hail-mary, and even then, it seems unlikely that their decision would be allowed to stand.
Holy good, this is fucking hilarious. You are to blame, Dan. You supported this wretched, crooked woman instead of a quality candidate. The protests should be aimed at you, the DNC, and their PIC the mainstream news media.
If Clinton had squeaked out an Electoral College win, and lost the popular vote by 2M, you can sure as hell bet we'd be hearing "ILLEGITIMATE PRESIDENCY" 24 hours a day.

We knew CaliguBush's presidency was gonna be bad after the Supreme Court installed him in 2000, but no one could've predicted what a warp speed, epic, national disaster that it became. We still haven't recovered, and President Twitter Troll is gonna stack the government with incompetent, openly racist, fascist ideologues that'll be a thousand times worse.
Asshole and his asshole followers don't give a shit about the rules. They never have. Asshole's entire life is a monument to exploiting loopholes, double dealing, contradicting yourself the second it would net him a dollar more than keeping his word. Why do you think he can't get a loan any more? They have no respect for any institution or any process.

So fight like hell. Contest every vote count. Make these fuckers earn it. If they lose on a technicality, let them cry. They're happy to win on any technicality they want, so who are they to judge? Who cares if Clinton has conceded? It's just words. Asshole's words aren't worth the paper they're written on. When you don't get his word in writing, they're worth even less. But asshole's followers give a shit about Hillary's words? Fuck them. Enjoy your post-fact universe.

Don't like it? Why don't you riot? Send the guys with the water cannons and the armored cars. Maybe you'll get sent to a private prison. That should be fun.

Keeping asshole out of office by hook or by crook will save lives. It will rescue millions of the most vulnerable people in America from sickness, exile, prison, or death. Do it for them.

Happy Holidays, motherfuckers. Oh, wait, did I violate one of your PC rules? Call the whaaaaaambulance.
^^^ said the moron who voted third party and the reason this is happening.

Your pot may be moldy, friend.

President-Elect trump is the President Elect because he won, by the rules, fair and square.

The Assholes who don't give a shit about the rules are the Whining Left, trying to delegitimize the results of the election by changing the rules after the game is over.

This country does not elect a President by popular vote. Never has.

The CryBabies complaining now about the Alexander Hamilton Electoral College wouldn't be peeping shit if Hillary had won the election (by winning the Electoral) while losing the popular vote.
No one is fooled.

But we must say, the whining and crying does deepen the joy of winning and enhances the experience….
^^^ How dare you sir! I voted for Hillary! Obviously. Anybody with basic reading comprehension cold have deduced that.

What I said was being a huge flaming dick (Dan Savage) to third party voters would not make them change their votes to Democrat. And it didn't, did it? Has it ever? Every election Democrats take the socialists and greens for granted, and every election they stay pissed. Either be nice to them, or plan on not getting their votes. Anyway, what cost Hillary was Democrats who didn't vote Democrat, not socialists and greens who didn't vote Democrat. Go yell at your fellow Democrats. Because that yelling shit wins votes.

I don't favor being nice to asshole and his asshole followers because being nice to them will accomplish doodly squat.
I think my favorite part about this thread is the self satisfied hypocritical smugness that Democrats have. It's just an extension of the hypocrisy they've exhibited this whole year.

Whose rallies were subject to mass protests? Trump.
Who was accused of attacking dissenters? Conservatives.
Who also attacked dissenters in their rallies? Clintonites.

Who was accused of taking to the streets if their candidate lost? Republicans.
Who actually took to the streets when their candidate lost? Democrats.

Who was accused of contesting the vote if their candidate lost? Conservatives.
Who is calling for a vote audit? Democrats.

Who was mocked for suggesting that elections are Rigged? Trump.
Who is now calling the election rigged? Democrats.

"Oh, but we're justified because Trump is a double plus racist asshole." The funny thing is, I'd be rallying with you guys post-election. But, you "liberals" were such collective assholes pre-election that I can't even do that.

Remember when Berners were bitching about superdelegates and saying how they were unfairly skewing the election and causing people to go with the winner? Remember your response? THEM'S THE RULES. Clinton knows what she was getting into when she started this game. You can't change it now. So suck it up and fall in line.
All this whining reminds us of that Super Bowl when the SeaHogs choked and the Patriots won.
(sort of like the patriots winning the recent election after the opposition choked, but we digress…)

Did you know Seattle was ROBBED of that Super bowl victory?
Yes. it's true.

Seattle had more total yards than New England.
Total Yards!!

True, the Patriots had more touchdowns and field goals and stuff but who the fuck cares about that?
Those are just racist scoring mechanisms invented in the Jim Crow South.

Seattle had the most Righteous Total Yards and thus won the fucking Super Bowl!

What recourse do we, The Robbed, have now?

We must not accept this fraudulent Super Bowl championshit.


Work it! In the Streets!!

wait. there's more.

The Fradulent Super Bowl XLIX MVP was seen groping the ass of the center all night.
plus he is married to a Super Model.
plus he is too pretty, he surely is a self-loathing closet case.
and don't get us started on the saggy balls…


You should do a column about it, Mr Savage.

The freedom of the Electors to vote as the please is the rules too. The real point is that if you're going to hitch your wagon to the genius of the Electoral College system, then take it like a man. If it were nothing more than a system of allocating votes, the Electors could be mere clerks or couriers, who delivered the vote totals accurately to Congress. The Constitution doesn't just say they have to show up and produce a certain number of votes. It says they vote. As they please. Even the state laws that try to bind them are unconstitutional on their face.

So the real icing on the cake is that if the Electors do overtrun Trumps supposed win, it will be the crisis we need to get rid of the EC once and for all. Everyone will agree it's a travesty.

But until then? THEMS [no apostrophe because it's not possessive it's plural just saying] THE RULES.
John Bailo is the dumbest motherfucker on the planet. Give it a rest, dude. Nobody even reads your shit.
Yes. The rules. "Fair and square"

JULY 29, 2016
A federal appeals court decisively struck down North Carolina’s voter identification law on Friday, saying its provisions deliberately “target African-Americans with almost surgical precision” in an effort to depress black turnout at the polls.
You think other anti-Democratic shenanigans weren't effected between July & November in any place the GOP controlled the polls?

Fair & square, like my ass.
The judges noted that Republican leaders had drafted their restrictions on voting only after receiving data indicating that African-Americans would be the voters most significantly affected by them.
Hm. Racist legislators in North Carolina. Whodathunk?
Wow. you make Trump out to be some kind of Joe Kennedy or something…
(Spanx can do wonders for shaping your square ass, btw…)
@14 @15 The system is RIGGED!

Well, normally I'd be saying that if you fuckers hadn't spoiled it in October.

Because I truly agree that there was a lot of voter suppression, but by acting the way we did in October, any decrying of voter suppression would be treated as a sore loser.

If Hillary had won and the Trumpsters were pulling the same kind of shit, you and Savage and all the other asshole Clintonites would be on here calling them sore racist losers who just can't stand that Trump lost.
For once I agree with trump. America is not a democracy.
What a sham this Electoral College crap is. How gullible has the US and the world been. Here we all have been thinking America, like other countries in the west, was a democracy.
So you've got a situation where it takes
705,454 Californians to get one electoral vote,
and 194,717 voters from Wyoming equals one electoral vote.
No way you can spin this to say; hey, this fucker trump won in a democratic vote.
America, just another tin pot regime, like Nth Korea and Russia.
@2 perhaps you have forgotten the Federalist papers No. 86?

"All these advantages will happily combine in the plan devised by the convention; which is, that the people of each State shall choose a number of persons as electors, equal to the number of senators and representatives of such State in the national government, who shall assemble within the State, and vote for some FIT [i.e. not a con artist reality TV "star"] person as President.

"The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of [Donald Trump (]who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications [)]. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. "
@19 -- You're quoting Alexander Hamilton, who, in contrast to the fictional character of a recently successful musical, despised democracy, and promoted a system of electing the president that was abandoned a long time ago. (Electors were previously selected by state governments, not by the citizens voting in an election.) This type of cult-like Founding-Father-worship is actively dangerous.
The first comment is of course correct -- Dan misses the point. Trump doesn't say that he could have "won California" in a popular contest -- as statement that would be meaningless in a popular contest. He's saying he could have picked up another 1.5-2 million votes by campaigning in more populous states. And there is a very real chance that he's right. I think we as a progressives need to do some serious soul-searching right now.
What Clinton's margin means is that Trump supporters are NOT entitled to claim to be "America" and to say everyone else is "unAmerican".

And their guy won, so they no longer have any call to be resentful or vindictive about anything-especially since none of the groups they are lashing out at in overgrown school-bully style ever did anything even remotely harmful to any of them.
BTW, there simply isn't any reason for people in small states to have a greater say in who becomes president than the rest of the nation. Living in a small state, in a small town OR on a farm doesn't make anyone intrinsically superior to the rest of the human race. Nor does living in the South or the Mountain West make anyone anymore "deserving" of special political deference than anyone in a large city or on either coast. We are ALL "Americans" and none of us is that far above or below anyone else. And there's no such thing as a "special snowflake". There are just people who are legitimately terrified of being persecuted because of their race, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or ethnic/religious origins because, due to an electoral system designed by and for slaveowners, bankers, and industrialists, a hatemonger, with no experience in statecraft and no competence in his chosen field, rejected in the popular vote count is going to be imposed as president. It's not making a big deal over nothing to be worried over that. And when Obama was sworn in, nobody who voted against him had any reason to actually fear for her or his safety. None of them had any reason to think they would even lose anything. And none of them did.
@ 24 says, "There are just people who are legitimately terrified of being persecuted ...."


@ 22, Tyranny of the majority is exactly what all the Latina / Muslim / LGBT / etc. folks are worried about. Granted, demographics are changing, and straight WASPy types may not be the majority anymore -- but they're still in power.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.