According to CNN, Hillary Clinton had more votes than Trump (47,6% against 47,5%). But, since you have that system of electors representing each estate casting ballots, Trump wins 289 vs. 218.

I just applied that system to my country's last election and the results are catastrophic: my last elected President won by 51.34% of total votes against 48.66% of his opponent. But giving each Province (state) a ballot equivalent to every territory population (I took the same numbers of the Deputies Chamber, which are also elected in a proportion of each Province population), and my current President would have lost 78 against 159 of his oponent

Point is, why isn't the President elected by most total votes instead of that cheap system assigning ballots to each estate? Imagine if just one person voted in California, and all the Alaska state voted... that person in California would be more valuable than the will of 710,000 Americans

So she won?

It's just so all the states can feel important and not be outweighed by one massive state.

I agree it's a mess in moments like these but that's what they have so...

She had more votes, but that's not how it works in USA. It's so stupid...

I don't understand the logic, in a democracy, the majority should choose. At the end of the day, with that system, a vote in California or Florida counts more than a vote in Hawaii or Alaska... shouldn't every vote count, no matter where you're from?

Not with the electoral vote which is what determines the president. She only has the popular vote.

is not like there's a large difference tho....

they should have restricted people with IQ/EQ lower than a specific number to vote tbh. as well as people older than a specific age... you know, why could a dying nanny could vote but a youngster could not?

Popular vote is messy in our country. Our nation voted a warmonger who tried to fight against China with toy soldiers and baby rockets.

EV is probably the dumbest system in the history. It has always been everywhere in any system ever that whoever gets more votes wins, but oh well, it's America.

Yes. It's ridiculous that she had more votes but he won.

Absolutely senseless!

"Only"? Aren't elections about the POPULAR VOTE? And y'all were pressed about Cuba for so many years

You must be a Trump supporter.

And IT IS a large difference, it changes who wins

Yes I find the American system truly weird.....
Also the 2 party system in America is dumb.
The lack of choice made them decide between hillary and donald (both not qualified).
Why not use the contintental european system with like 10-12 parties in parliament?

no i'm not. the system is stupid. but she only won over 0.1%.
limiting old people and incapable voters are way efficient (i know it's super controversial to say that)
but how could you let people who can barely live for 2 more years choose the future for people who have to live in that place for over 60 years?
and how could you let people who have no ideas of what the world is happening vote for the future of the world?

It's the pits!

I'm so confused. That's so dumb
Can someone explain what 'first to 270' meant. I wanted to point out there's only 50 states but I didn't wanna get dragged

What is the premise for choosing electoral voting over preferential voting?

each state is allocated with different amount of "state vote" according to their population.
like Texas with 3X and California with 5X

Who are you to decide who is capable and who isn't to vote? And how would you know how many years a person would live? Please get off from this thread, I'm being serious right now and I can't deal with trolls.

I didn't say anything about obligatory vote (that my country has) because I knew someone like you was going to say that, but you still appeared

I mean yeah "only"

Popular vote in the US has no real power on the national level

Your elected officials in the House and Senate wields all of that

It's dumb but it is what it is