Nittany Flier wrote:I guess you could classify this as ancient history, but I believe Nixon won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote to Kennedy.
Flier - Nixon did not win the popular vote, but he lost it by a hair's breath. Something like 120,000 votes nation wide, which is really amazing when you think about it (and there were allegations of voter fraud in Texas and Illinois that potentially could have boosted Kennedy on the popular vote). There were also some issues with the electoral college as some electors did not vote the popular vote and cast their votes for someone else. I believe Mississippi and Alabama cast their electoral votes for a different candidate (can't now recall his name, but it was basically a Democrat that wasn't a Catholic - remember this was a Klan dominated south and they weren't voting for a Papist).
The assertion that the Russian's interfered in our elections trying to influence them is pretty funny. Of course, they did as did most other nations. They were wildly unsuccessful as usual because it is incredibly difficult to interfere in a national election in the USA.
I agree with you. I think there was "interference" by the Russians in the sense that different nations play this game. But, the idea that a few hundred thousdand dollar investment by the Russians (which is what is being alleged) was sufficient to elect a President is, to me, ridiculous. Whomever above said the problem was that Hillary ran an awful campaign is, in my view, spot on. She didn't really campaign in states that voted for Obama but where it was close. She basically ignored PA, MI and WI and all 3 of those went for Trump. She is an awful person and was an awful candidate. That's why Trump won. There were all kinds of polls out at the time that said had Sanders been the candidate he would have mopped the floor with Trump. But, the Democrats rigged the primary to ensure they got her. And, they got completely what they deserved.
The Russian bots showing up on social media is a problem, I guess, but they are not doing any more damage to us than we are doing to ourselves. Our problem was in 2016 our choices were someone awful or someone awful. And, enough people in enough states voted for the someone awful they knew less about.
All the Democrats who presumed that Mueller was going to find proof of collusion look like a bunch of schmucks right now. And, their parsing the report and saying that it doesn't fully exonerate Trump (and I'm sure it doesn't) misses the point. The piont is - no collusion. He can now beat that drum until November of 2020. The Dems better hope the economy goes quickly south (and it may) or we are all going to have to live with 4 more years of The Donald.