You idiot.

In 1992 Clinton won the popular vote by 5.8 million votes and 370 electoral votes to Bush Sr.’s 168.

It was an absolute trouncing, partially due to Perot’s success as a 3rd party candidate splitting the vote despite the overall low turnout of 43%.

Delusions don’t change reality or a quick Wikipedia check.

🙄

Most states have passed laws requiring electors to vote in line with that state’s popular vote or face penalties from fines to jail time. It’s usually a winner take all scenario. This means as long as 50.1% of the population of each state votes for a candidate, that candidate gets 100% of the electoral votes.

So we don’t directly vote for the President, but their votes are supposed to follow ours.

The math works out funny though, with this all or nothing strategy. It causes misrepresentation at times and tends to benefit rural votes over urban ones. It would be more representational if all states followed the examples of Maine and Nebraska and split their electoral votes proportionately to follow the popular vote or eliminate the electoral college altogether.

Our votes should always matter and the electoral college should reflect that.

That’s important. If it’s not to you, maybe you want to think about moving somewhere that has a nice macho authoritarian because real Americans care about protecting democracy enough to educate themselves on how the while thing works (for starters) and protecting the sanctity of the vote (over spouting outright lies, misinformation, and abject nonsense).

🙄🙄🙄