[TheRealThing]

⬆️
Look at vote totals. Consider %’s. Now, as stated before, the Trump campaign was very skilled in the Rust Belt. Without question. However, his margin of victory depends upon a voting bloc that is not monolithic, thus, we will meet in years to come at PMG, and you will buy me a big steak. Suggestion: replace crickets with peacocks, as self-portraits classier.

I did look at the vote totals and so did most of your liberal buddies who were out in the streets acting like idiots screaming noooooo, all election night. Maybe you should look at the vote totals and the percentages?


CLICK ME
[attachment=o3721]
The map above shows the county level and vote share results of the 2016 US Presidential Election. The darker the blue (specks) the more a county went for Hilary Clinton and the darker the red the more the county went for Donald Trump.

This map helps explain why Trump was able to win, despite winning over 2.2. million fewer votes (at the time of writing) than Clinton. Her votes were very concentrated in only a few states whereas Trump’s votes came from a wide enough geographic area to capture the Electoral College.

Overall Trump won approximately 2,600 counties to Clinton’s 500, or about 84% of the geographic United States. However, Clinton won 88 of of the 100 largest counties (including Washington D.C.). Without these 100 largest counties she would have lost by 11.5 million votes.


Clinton won California by 3,446,281 votes. ACCORDING TO WKI, Clinton's total national popular vote total surpassed that of DJT by only 2,864,974. You take the 3 or 4 million illegal votes cast in California out of the equation and Trump would have had the popular vote margin.

For anyone who'd care to take a look at the state by state popular vote totals, Trump versus Clinton.
https://heavy.com/news/2016/11/how-many-...-by-state/