and with that, republicans lose the PV in 6 of 7 elections, historic margins afaik.
that split happening 2 times in 20 years is something very rare too.....
I have an issue with saying you lose the popular vote when the winner is under 50 by a significant amount. The further away from 50 you are, the less "winning the popular vote" means, and this election more than any other recent election saw a larger dispersal of votes to multiple 3rd party candidates as opposed to just one main one. If Clinton had won 50% of the vote, she probably would've won the Electoral College. That makes 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2016 -four of the past 7 elections - where the person that received the most votes did not achieve a majority.
A Democrat has only gotten a majority of the vote twice in the past 10 elections.
I'm sorry that mathematics offends you.
I don't give much credit to winning the vote when we start splitting the vote more than 2 ways. If we were basing who won the election on popular vote, you would change the vote of a lot of Johnson, Stein, and McMullin voters for starters which is 6 million votes right there.
2004 by the way.
Which is why we need RPV. I could live with RPV + the EC.
