Plot twist, contrary to what Hillary and the liberal media told you, the following things are true:
1. The world is still intact and functioning the exact same as it was before.
2. Nobody has died due to the election.
3. Nobody has (yet) emigrated from our country.
4. Nobody has been deported due to Donald Trump
5. Nobody has been refused marriage, birth control, or forced to go through conversion therapy due to Donald Trump
6. Nobody has been affected by gun control laws that haven't not been made yet, due to Donald Trump.
... this list could go on.
Here are some things that are false:
1. Hillary should be president because she won the popular vote.
-- The electoral college is designed specifically to be a democratic
republic. The USA is not, nor has ever been, nor should be a true democracy. In a democracy, the candidate would only have to win a 60% majority in the top XXX MSAs (metropolitan statistical areas) to win the presidency. This is overly pessimistic, because usually the candidate from the democratic party does much better than that in MSAs proper - Hillary won NYC by 87%, won the next largest LA area by 71%, the next largest Chicago by 74%, etc. Regardless, at 60-40 ratio of votes for candidate A in the largest MSAs, and assuming people not residing in the top 100 MSAs vote at a rate of 30-70, less favorable to candidate A, candidate A would win after winning 80% of the vote in only
39 cities, whereas with a more modest 60% win rate it would still only take about 100 cities for the candidate to win. In this method, candidate A could spend all of his/her time focusing on the top, say, 60-65 cities, and as long as they got
some votes in the rural areas would be almost guaranteed an easy win. This, to be frank, basically disenfranchises the rural voters because it encourages candidates to spend all of their time in the large cities to rack up as high a vote total as possible.
-- The electoral college is in place to prevent mob rule. There are times that one vote does not equal one vote, yes, but that is because the electoral college acts as a statistical sieve to
lower the likelihood that one group can heavily influence the election. In the electoral college system, the voting power is spread out between rural voters in Montana, whose votes *are* theoretically "worth" slightly more, and those who live in the inner city in Los Angeles, whose votes are worth slightly less. However, when you consider that there are many millions more people living in LA than in the entire state of Montana, it becomes evident that this system actually doesn't do enough to ensure that everyone's voice counts. In a true democracy, you end up in cases where the 50.001% of the population would be able to assume total control over the 49.999% who may, in fact, have completely different views. In this system, it is theoretically impossible to have a candidate win without representing a relatively large area both
geographically and population-wise. The alternative, as mentioned above, would be allowing a geographically small but populated area to rule the entire country when most of the candidates from the populated areas may have no clue what rural voters and smaller towns actually want.
2. Donald Trump did anything illegal.
-- If Donald Trump did anything that would make him register on a watch list if found guilty (you know what I am referring to),
he would either be in jail, or being investigated right now.
This has been disproven multiple times, there
is no current investigation because there is no evidence to show that any wrongdoing occurred. Regardless of your opinion on his statements, if you actually read them, he specifically said "they let you", which by itself implies consent. Vulgarity and crudeness does not make it wrong in and of itself.
3. Donald Trump didn't file taxes.
-- Donald has filed taxes every year (and been audited a large number of years in recent past). He didn't pay taxes one year
due in part to a loophole created by democrats allowing him to take investment losses as a tax break. Basically, he was allowed to claim his loss in money due to investments going down in value as a reduction in his taxes for the year, and carry forward any loss over his tax liability to the next year. This, from multiple independent accountants
as reported by the Wall Street Journal, is something both
any businessman would do, as well as something Ms. Clinton had actually done herself in the past.
4. Donald Trump says outrageous things and means every single one of them, and has no concrete comprehensive policy ideas.
-- He uses
truthful hyperbole, a literary device, to get people's attention. Let's also look back at when Ms. Clinton claimed to "land under fire" when in reality no such thing happened (and repeated that claim for decades until called out on it). This was another example of truthful hyperbole - she landed in an active conflict zone but not "under fire". Yet it's easier to say "under fire" than "I landed in an active conflict zone but not under direct combat". Likewise, it's easier to say "we're going to build a wall" than "We have a comprehensive national security and jobs plan that includes building a physical barrier to persons entering the country without the use of legitimate methods such as immigration checkpoints to protect our jobs and security"; it's easier to say "we will ban Muslims" (which he later clarified) than "We have a comprehensive national security plan that includes using religion and country of origin in combination to conduct a preliminary screen on entrants to our country to prevent radical Muslims from ISIS and other organizations from entering our country, without negatively affecting most well-meaning entrants."; and it's easier to say "we will do away with Obamacare" than "We have a comprehensive healthcare reform plan that includes the repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act with a plan that involves interstate plans which can be sold by companies across state lines with lower premiums and many plan types so that everyone can choose the plan that is right for them, while also doing away with certain requirements of the ACA that have increased premiums for everyone to pay for programs only some of the participants use, allowing people to choose plans with these programs if they want, but not being required to if they do not want."
-- See how much you wouldn't have liked to hear anyone sit there and tell you every part of their policy? It's your job (if you are one) as a voter to research the
candidates policies yourself.
Basically, people who voted for Ms. Clinton seem to have underestimated the number of people in this country that
vote based on true political issues facing our country, and not social issues. It's called politics for a reason, and politicians are not social justice warriors for a reason. Everyone who was surprised by the Trump win needs to look back at why they voted, did they vote because they support gay marriage, or did they vote because they want the US to become the world power it once was yet again? Personally, I voted for someone who I trusted to make America great again. Sure, I don't agree with everything he or Mike Pence support, but it's much more important to me that my children have the American Dream to look forward to than if I am able to get married to the man of my dreams in the short term. Social issues will resolve themselves eventually without electing someone who is politically inept (look at slavery, which was abolished with almost 100% republican and 0% democratic support, etc). It just happens that the GOP is slower to adopt social issues in their platform, instead leaving them ambiguous until a societal norm has been
clearly established. I have no problem waiting for the GOP to adopt gay marriage, or abortion rights, etc, because I know it will happen eventually (and likely in the next 8 years). However, what I cannot wait for is the democratic party to adopt strong views towards national security, the military, immigration, etc., because I know it will not happen. The democratic party is more interested in social issues, which
this election proves that the American voter is not more interested in than political issues. For this reason, I voted for Donald Trump, and I have absolutely no regrets.
Post scriptum: Please watch his
entire victory speech, in which he both thanks Hillary for her decades of dedication to public service, and outlines how he will reach to all in congress and the country to make the transition and presidency as smooth as he can. He is being very respectable and modest about his victory, whereas Ms. Clinton chose to do something no candidate in recent history has done and privately call the victor then go to bed without making a public statement.
Post post scriptum: If you actually read this entire post, thank you. Hopefully it has opened your eyes as to how Trump won and why it's good.