You know what? based on last night Montanas vote?

[busterbrown]

I Think Trump would have beat Hillary ( whom I voted For)? On a straight vote...

Based on new events tonight? Jarred and his Father in Law must feel iike kicking each other in the ass.

Three Stooge style..

[Dawson Leery]

1. No.

HRC lead the popular vote the whole time.
Unlikely he would get more popular vote.

[busterbrown]

4. I think the election in Montana last night..

simply proved the ignorence of our electorate.. .. .. Yea, I’m pissed

[Spider Jerusalem]

30. You clearly don't know what you're talking about

Trump won by 20%; Gianforte won by 5%. Montana was probably going to go Republican anyway, and the fact that it was that close means that Republicans should be worried elsewhere.

[busterbrown]

34. I agree a disaster.. I embarrased myself tonight.

Thinking that state totals (electoral votes) were dependent on elctorial districts, not popular vote.. Where trhe hell did I come up with thta... and I’m fairly well informed1

[Igel]

32. "Proved"? Hardly.

Most of the votes had been cast before this incident. Yet all the votes were deemed cast on election day.

The record, at first glance, says that the electorate ignored the event. It's also quite possible that the electorate would have done things differently had they voted after the event, on the official election day. The price we pay for early and mail voting is insensitivity to events immediately prior to the election.

As it is, there's a certain insensitivity to things that occur too soon before you vote. If you vote at 8 a.m. you may well not have noticed something in the 11 o'clock news the previous night. And if you have you own little echo-chamber of a news media, what you hear may not be what Joe down the street hears.

Your conclusion may be true, but your syllogism isn't sufficient to get you there.

[Me.]

2. Are You Forgetting The 3 Million More Votes?

[busterbrown]

3. Yep and thats the result of Gerrymandering,,,

No?

[Me.]

5. What?

Dems haven't gerrymandered, the Cons have.

[H2O Man]

7. I suspect that

is exactly what busterbrown is saying. A presidential election is comprised of 50 state contests. Many of those states are gerrymandered by rabid, racist republicans. Thus, a candidate can have a 3 million lead in popular votes nationally, and still lose.

[busterbrown]

9. Exactly..Thanks Water Man.. perhaps..

I should drink less wine and more water..

[Me.]

12. Hilarious

[H2O Man]

14. While I no

longer consume alcohol, the news makes me look closely at the supply of Irish brews my sons have stored here!

[busterbrown]

18. Im on the same page..

I do think I’m a hell of a lot more cognizant of how careful I must be..
Age and being married for 28 yrs.. certainly helps my minimum consumnption habits.

[Me.]

13. As Ever

[H2O Man]

15. The past few

weeks have been absolutely wild, have they not? And to think the pace will be picking up after the weekend!

[Me.]

23. DEar Mr. Nance

Calling espionage. Truly no turning back, no longer if, but when. And yes, wild, and being witnesses to it all. Extraordinary.

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. No? Gerrymandering applies to Congressional representation.

A candidate can have a popular vote lead of three million and still lose because of the Electoral College (and because a lot of Democratic votes are concentrated in states like California and New York and Massachusetts, or in blue enclaves in red states where there aren't enough of them to affect the outcome). Voter suppression matters in general elections, on the state level, but gerrymandering, not so much.

[Ace Rothstein]

6. Gerrymandering has nothing to do with last night's loss or Clinton's loss.

[busterbrown]

8. What? have you taken note on how Republican Controlled State Assemblies

gerrymandered their state.. Stacking Black and Hispanic voters to the point that their votes meant little.

[Ace Rothstein]

10. I have.

That in no way, shape or form has an effect on the Electoral College outside of two small states.

[busterbrown]

16. So results were changed because of Comey?

Give me a break..What beat us was a combination of what bhappened last night in Montona plus gerrymandering..which has a huge effect on how states react to elections..How many state legislatures who were controlled by Republicans had an electorate which voted for Hillary..

Control the state and you basically controll the electorate.

[Ace Rothstein]

19. Gerrymandering is why the Republicans have a bigger margin in the House than they should have.

It has a limited effect on Presidential races because only two states split their votes by Congressional districts.

[busterbrown]

21. but isnt the voting in those district stacked......Electoral

votes are counted by districts correct... I mean on election night.. Pundints are all over electoral districts adding them up by the hour...No?

[Ace Rothstein]

24. No

48 states award their votes by strictly vote count in that state.

[busterbrown]

26. Got it Ace!

Always thought electoral votes were counted by electoral districts..

Wow and I consider myselg fairly educated to these things. Wow! Embarrasing

[hatrack]

11. Montana can't be gerrymandered - it's an at-large seat

There are no CDs, only voting precincts.

That said, plenty of gerrymandering from sea to shining seas elsewhere, God knows.

[busterbrown]

17. Did not know that..

But I do know that small populated huge geographical states would be neary impossible to Gerrymander.
Would be too obvious. Am I wrong?

[meow2u3]

33. Montana cannot be gerrymandered, at least regarding Congress

They have only 1 rep.

[DefenseLawyer]

20. According to the 2010 census there were 4,027 black people in the whole state

It was 90% white and 6% Native American. How exactly do you extrapolate a national election result from what happened in Montana in a special election for an at large congressman?

[busterbrown]

25. I was speaking in general terms with

regards to the G.E. count in the Trump November win...Just deleted my original post... Thanks.

[busterbrown]

27. I thought Gerrymandering effects national elections

Thought they counted electoral votes by districts.. And I’m moderately informed of these things.. embarrasing.

[DefenseLawyer]

29. It's all good

DU is like a college dorm room at 2 am. There are all kinds of ideas floating around. They don't all hit the mark, but they move to conversation along.

[davsand]

22. Polling data prior to the election showed the Republican with a lead.

Conventional wisdom was that the Repub's massive spending and his name recognition from his Governor's race were gonna give him an easy ride to the win. I've seen several reports that the early voting was very strong--some estimated 70% of the total votes cast were in the door prior to the assault happening. Same day registrations and walk-in voters on election day were just not strong enough to offset that early lead. It is not a shock that he won.

I'm betting on some buyers' remorse in the case of some of those early voters, but Montana was a state that tRump won by a huge margin. Quite frankly, I doubt that a lot of those voters care that the Republican roughed up a reporter--they voted for an assailant for President too...

I think it is remarkable that the margin of that win was under two digits. THAT is really telling, IMO.


Laura

[busterbrown]

28. I agree...Thanks.