Trump winning the Presidency...

Dave Wasserman Verified account

‏@Redistrict

By my estimates, of 227 million eligible voters in U.S.:

40.3% didn't vote

28.8% voted Clinton

27.7% voted Trump

3.2% voted someone else



4 out of 10 eligible voters stayed home
 
57Brave said:
Dave Wasserman Verified account
‏@Redistrict

By my estimates, of 227 million eligible voters in U.S.:

40.3% didn't vote
28.8% voted Clinton
27.7% voted Trump
3.2% voted someone else


4 out of 10 eligible voters stayed home
Click to expand...

We had 75% eligible voter turnout in Minnesota. We're not that big a state, so it doesn't take a lot of non-participation nationally to bring the number down, but man, it is difficult for me to believe that many people don't give a sh*t.
 
As the analytics of this election trickle out.
Heard an interesting report on Pew Research numbers yesterday that I'd love to start discussion - stupid job messing with my research time :)

Funny how the polls nailed it on overall vote.
One conversation I heard pointed out that grizzled pro's saw HRC was vulnerable in that she never crossed 50%. Don't think it was a 538 led conversation either.
 
57Brave said:
Dave Wasserman Verified account
‏@Redistrict

By my estimates, of 227 million eligible voters in U.S.:

40.3% didn't vote
28.8% voted Clinton
27.7% voted Trump
3.2% voted someone else


4 out of 10 eligible voters stayed home
Click to expand...

Which makes it all the more ridiculous that people were blaming Johnson/Stein voters for the outcome.
 
gilesfan said:
There are 3,141 counties in the U.S.; Trump won 3,084 of them.
Click to expand...

So places where more people actually live closely amongst and with each other voted against the more demographically-divisive, fear-mongering candidate*. Hmm.

(*To be clear, as most here know, I was by no means a fan of his opponent, either.)
 
acesfull86 said:
Which makes it all the more ridiculous that people were blaming Johnson/Stein voters for the outcome.
Click to expand...

In a sea of vapid establishment center-liberal post mortes, this has been one of the most vapid.
 
jpx7 said:
So places where more people actually live closely amongst and with each other voted against the more demographically-divisive, fear-mongering candidate*. Hmm.

(To be clear, as most here know, I was by no means a fan of his opponent, either.)
Click to expand...

Yes, good point. I also see the point of the Electoral college and not having 1% of an area of the U.S. being able to vote president.
 
More interesting numbers gleaned from last months election:
................................................................................

Our observation: The less-than-500 counties that Hillary Clinton carried nationwide encompassed a massive 64 percent of America’s economic activity as measured by total output in 2015. By contrast, the more-than-2,600 counties that Donald Trump won generated just 36 percent of the country’s output—just a little more than one-third of the nation’s economic activity.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-...de-high-output-america-vs-low-output-america/

........................

These numbers and this argument blows out of the water notions of makers and takers
??

And the future of innovation.
Rural America's unwillingness to invest in metropolitan infrastructure and how it holds us all back.
I am asking, isn't this exactly how our Rust Belt cities fell to ruin -
A what me worry lack of investment before the problem ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top