I know I'm really late to this. Just bare with me. By now, you know that President Trump won by the electoral vote despite the opposing candidate Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote. This isn't about the electoral college or how Hillary would be better. This is a "What if?" thought. What do you think would happen if Hillary won the presidency by the electoral vote while Trump won the popular vote? Not what do you think would happen during a supposed Hillary presidency. I'm just asking what do think would happen if Hillary won by the electoral vote at that moment? Personally, I think that if such an event did happen, people would believe that the election WAS rigged like Trump kept saying during the campaign, and then people would possibly create riots to permanately elimate the electoral college so fierce that the #NotMyPresident rallies would seem like hardly anything. And that would be the closest in recent U.S. history that the electoral college was about to be revoked. That's how I think about it. Do you think this would've happened, or am I just sounding ridiculous? Feel free to post what you think.
Forums / Discussion / General
235,745 total conversations in 7,824 threads
What it Hillary won the electoral vote?
Last posted
Apr 18, 2017 at 11:06AM EDT.
Added
Apr 16, 2017 at 08:33PM EDT
6 posts
from
6 users
Wisehowl
Deactivated
The #notmypresident rallies we've been seeing now have been quite girthy but rather short. I imagine the inverse if Hillary were elected president: protests going for extended periods with lower turnouts.
Trump would rage on twitter and call for recounts, Hillary would smugly dismiss it, and the world would move on. Had Trump not won it would've been the birther movement in terms of size and length: AKA not very.
What do you think would happen if Hillary won the presidency by the electoral vote while Trump won the popular vote?
First, it would mean Hillary had really bad turnout problems, likely resulting in Congress remaining Republican. Second, the popular perception and opinion would probably be severely against Clinton, leading to similar "not my president" and such demonstrations.
I think most of all, though, is that there would be a sustained movement to eliminate or severely alter the electoral college (I'd guess to one based on congressional districts rather than straight up national popular vote, since a popular vote one is unlikely to get the support of the flyover states). I don't think it would take very much to switch the tea party folks to going from Obamacare to the electoral college.
I haven't really seen much from the left-leaning side about altering the electoral college since Trump was sworn in. Everything's now been focused on him and his "outrageous" policies. That very well could have also happened in the reverse--but if Congress was still Republican, I'm not sure if the protests would all be focused on her. Congress could block her while the people would be free to fume over the electoral college and demand reform.
That being said, I still don't think even mass outrage from the Republican areas would cause an amendment to fully pass. State legislatures know full well what a popular vote (or even congressional district) election would mean to their state's importance in the election and even with a lot of angry constituents, I doubt that'd be enough to sway them to cut off their own nose.
What's also not being taken into consideration is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. If Trump had won the popular vote, then come December 19th, the electors from California, Washington, Illinois, D.C., Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Hawaii would be in a pretty bad spot--either back the compact and popular vote or prove the whole thing's a sham since it would elect the "wrong" candidate.
…closest in recent U.S. history…
Depending on how you define "recent," the attempt in 1970 is the closest so far. It had Nixon's support and passed 339-70 in the House before failing in the Senate 54-36 (technically, the Senate never actually voted it down, only filibustering the bill until the end of the term). 30 states were likely to approve it, 6 were leaning toward, 6 leaning against, and 8 firmly opposed (38 are needed).
/pol/ would have a meltdown instead of tumblr
After Shock
Deactivated
I doubt that the situation with Russia and NK would had been as precarious under her as they had been under Trump, for starters. At the very least they wouldn't had escalated during her Napoleonic period.
On the other hand, The GOP would likely continued being an opposition party and would have tried everything in their power to block her efforts. Possible leading to them being worse at policy making in 2020, 2024 or later if they do manage to get a candidate in the white house.
superjumpman wrote:
/pol/ would have a meltdown instead of tumblr
Oh god, I can imagine the weaponized autism spilling over the Internet even more.