Donald Trump is fuming at simple mathematics.

Summary

Donald Trump and his team are attacking media outlets like Politico and The New York Times for reporting that his 2024 election victory over Kamala Harris was narrow, not a “landslide.”

Trump won by 1.6 points and failed to secure a majority of the popular vote, a smaller margin than Hillary Clinton’s over him in 2016.

Despite these facts, Trump and his allies continue to tout his win as “historic” and “dominant,” aiming to bolster his political mandate amid criticisms that his victory was less decisive than claimed.

    • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
      1·
      1 year ago

      Wow, that makes more sense in politics than it does in quantum mechanics

      …

      Maybe we can model the quantum world on Politics.

      every time a politician has to make a statement he both agrees and disagrees until he knows who the audience.

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    2·
    1 year ago

    I mean, the popular vote means shit in the USA electoral system. Even if he didn’t achieve 50%, that is only a technicality, as he got 49.9%. So, he won also the popular vote by ~2,500,000 votes, which is more impressive than 1.6 points. So I think it was a landslide in its own terms, considering the triumphs in the Senate and the House. And fuck Trump, couldn’t fucking say this enough. Americans elected Trump. He is a consequence of their decisions. Own it.

  • Lung@lemmy.world
    21·
    1 year ago

    Honestly hilarious level of QQ. The election wasn’t rigged. He won by almost 100 electoral college votes. He had the most popular votes, by 2.5 million people, roughly 50%. Republicans swept House, Senate, and Governors

    Elections in the USA are always pretty close, that’s how it works. But this victory is a complete and total one with no real room for doubt

    You may not like it, but those are the facts. Don’t mimic the sad boy GOP crying “election fraud” — the people voted. Yes, that means there are people in this country that disagree with you and don’t trust the direction of the Democrats. You might call them brainwashed, bigoted, transphobic, or religious extremists, but they get to voice their desires anyway. Society is a push and pull between different value systems, and imagining half the country is “evil” will only cause more harm

    Nothing is going to stop the transition. Buckle up, and try harder next time. Maybe the Dems will actually let a primary happen rather than choosing your leader for you

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      1·
      1 year ago

      That “almost 100 electoral college votes” was conditional on as little as 200k total votes across three states contributing 44 EC votes, in all of which had at most a 2% lead. Anyone who actually thinks he won by a significant margin is an idiot.

      Wisconsin (10): +30k / 0.9%
      Pennsylvania (19): +81k / 1.7%
      Michigan (15): +80k / 1.4%

      Now regarding election fraud–not that the end result would change given how much more significant his leads in other states were, but playing devil’s advocate, getting 90k Harris votes thrown out in any one of those states could actually have made a difference for the state in question.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      11·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I think you’re pretty fucking far off in claiming that pointing out a couple of facts about the outcome being closer than he says = raging about ElEcTiOn FrAUd

  • xenomor@lemmy.world
    11·
    1 year ago

    Remember that his first official act as president in his first term was to send Sean Spicer out, literally on day one, to scold the press corp for seeing the paltry crowd at his inauguration. This guy is always, always just small dick energy in an ill-fitting suit.

      • evatronic@lemm.eeEnglish
        2·
        1 year ago

        I’m not one for conspiracy theories, and we don’t have any evidence to back up any sort of claims of rigging or election fraud. In fact, the various lawsuits Trump initiated in the last cycle and audits and recounts and so on provided a pretty damning pile of evidence for “not rigged”.

        Republicans aren’t rigging elections themselves. There’s no tomfoolery going on with voting machines, or people voting twice, or similar. They’re “rigging” it with legal means – disenfranchising voters, suppressing turnout, financing third party candidates to peel votes away from the other side, gerrymandering districts, and using massive propaganda systems to influence who decides to vote and what they choose when they do vote.

        All said, though, we can always make the system more robust, and increase both voters’ confidence in the system and allay any fears of actual rigging. But election reforms are often a “Democrat” issue, so almost any Republican will oppose meaningful reforms that don’t do one of the things above to suppress voters.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    0·
    1 year ago

    It’s amazing that photographer was there right at the moment Trump heard the true reports that he didn’t have a landslide. It’s amazing they were able to capture his exact expression at that exact moment.

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    0·
    1 year ago

    I kinda knew the popular vote thing would correct itself, I think the reason it’s this close at all is because most people don’t pay attention to politics as much as they should

  • Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works
    03·
    1 year ago

    There’s even rumors that votes in the swing states were fraudulent as well. A disproportionate number of “bullet ballots” in swing states alone may indicate foul going-ons. The only way to tell would be a recount, however.

    Edit: Seems the info is dubious, at best. Partially straight up wrong. Oh well. A few hours of hope was nice.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      1·
      1 year ago

      Problematic for a couple of reasons:

      1. You can’t just insert fake ballots, that would cause the vote count to be incorrect when compared to registered voters.

      2. A bullet ballot would support Trump, but have no impact on other races… races which we know Republicans won.

      Looking at Pennsylvania as an example:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania

      Trump - 3,542,505
      Harris - 3,421,088
      Stein - 34,508
      Oliver - 33,299
      Total - 7,031,400
      Trump won by 121,417

      Now compare that to the Senate election:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania

      McCormick - 3,395,785
      Casey - 3,378,356
      Libertarian - 89,475
      Green - 66,185
      Constitution - 23,586
      Total - 6,953,384

      So 78,016 more people voted in the Presidential race than the Senate race, which is not enough to have given Trump the win if they were all bullet ballots.

      • nexusband@lemmy.world
        0·
        1 year ago

        You don’t have to fake ballots. You can just throw absentee ballots out, after them being challenged…which happens since 2000 (it’s apparently one of the reasons Bush won), this time however there have been over 800k ballots that have been thrown out…in swing states alone.

        Considering the margins are so slim, a few 100k challenged voters here and there…and you have “We don’t need your votes, we have enough” https://youtu.be/X3hXeEiFcJM

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          1·
          1 year ago

          That isn’t the claim though. The claim is enough “bullet ballots” (Trump only ballots) had been inserted to flip the election.

          Elections don’t work that way. I was telling people the same thing in 2016 and 2020.

          When people cast a vote, it’s tied to a registration. If you insert a bunch of votes, you end up with more ballots than voters.

          • adarza@lemmy.caEnglish
            0·
            1 year ago

            counting machines could be compromised and doing an office space thing in targeted areas, flipping one democrat vote for every 10 counted. no one would question it. only a hand count would verify, and those aren’t usually done anymore.

            • Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works
              1·
              1 year ago

              THIS.

              They had direct access to our voting machines during their bullshit “inquiries”.

              The voting machines that ARE KNOWN to have direct access vulnerabilities.