Summary

Trump’s popular vote share has fallen below 50% to 49.94%, with Kamala Harris at 48.26%, narrowing his margin of victory.

Trump’s share of the popular vote is lower than Biden’s in 2020 (51.3%), Obama’s in 2012 (51.1%) and 2008 (52.9%), George W. Bush’s in 2004 (50.7%), George H.W. Bush’s in 1988 (53.2%), Reagan’s in 1984 (58.8%) and 1980 (50.7%), and Carter’s in 1976 (50.1%).

The 2024 election results highlight Trump’s narrow victory and the need for Democrats to address their mistakes and build a diverse working-class coalition.

The numbers also give Democrats a reason to push back on Trump’s mandate claims, noting most Americans did not vote for him.

129 points

The fact that a majority of voters did not want Trump to win makes me simultaneously feel happy (that I’m not surrounded by idiots) and more depressed (that the Electoral College has screwed us AGAIN!)

permalink
report
reply
167 points
*

It’s a lack of majority not a lack of plurality. Harris is still trailing Trump by 3m votes or so (and 1.6%), Trump is just not above 50% after further votes have been counted. So this isn’t an electoral college steal

permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

Yeah, but even if Kamala wins the popular vote, this is going to be the closest a republican has gotten in…

Decades?

Maybe longer?

But the DNC is going to latch onto this and try to claim if they had moved just a little more right they’d have won.

Regardless of what happens, the DNC will always say the answer is moving to the right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points
*

The DNC brain trust is already claiming that they should go further to the right

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Well yeah they’re strategists are essentially corporate lobbyists.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Regardless of what happens, the DNC will always say the answer is moving to the right.

This isn’t borne out by trending or statements. What kind of crystal ball are you smoking?

permalink
report
parent
reply
56 points
*

FPTP should get FAR more attention as the culprit for this situation. Sure, the electoral college caused Kamala to lose (or whatever) but if we had a true democracy, there wouldn’t be only two possible parties to choose from.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

This fixes congress. How does this fix the presidency, which is one single office?

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

FPTP applies to ALL political offices in a country that uses it.

Using the presidency in this graphic would have been a very poor choice to display the difference between the two. Comparing 1 result with another result on a scale of 1 person would not have the pedagogical weight that the Congress graphic does.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It could give people opportunities to vote for third parties without feeling like they’re throwing away their vote

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

Don’t worry, you’re still surrounded by idiots no matter who wins the presidency

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Yeah does it really make that much of a difference in terms of “being surrounded by idiots” whether 51% of the people around you are idiots or 49%? Sure, I’d prefer the 49% scenario, especially if there’s an election happening, but you’re still surrounded by idiots.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

The fact that Trump could get elected at all, let alone twice, is proof that there’s too many idiots to want to participate in normal society

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Typical liberal cope.

“We KINDA won!”

Face it y’all. Democrats and liberals are a LOSING block. FAILURES.

I’ll continue to vote straight D, because it’s the only choice I got. Fucking losers and failures.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

He still had more of the popular vote than Harris, it was just they were both less than 50% due to 3rd party votes. So neither had a “majority” of the vote.

So he still would have won, even under a purely popular vote based system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Another thing it means is that if we had ranked choice voting, those 3rd party votes would be the deciding factor in who won the presidency.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

If we had ranked choice and got rid of the electoral college*

A lot of those third party votes are in solid red or blue states where it wouldn’t matter. Also a lot of the third party votes this time was for rfk and the libertarian Oliver, who wouldve probably went to trump so the outcome would probably be the same.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Since it’s just about a half split, you’re at least semi-circled by idiots.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

So stay away from walls and other obstacles you can back into…got it!

permalink
report
parent
reply
99 points

To be clear, because the headline I think is a bit misrepresentative. Trump still has over a million more votes than Harris. He just no longer has over 50% of the votes cast.

It’s like 49% Trump, 48% Harris, 3% Other. So Trump still won the popular vote.

This isn’t a “the Electoral College screwed us” situation. He still “won” the popular vote. He just didn’t win a “majority” of the votes cast.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Yep. And as much as I’d like to blame 3rd party voters, even if they all voted Harris to giver her the majority, she’d have still lost due to electoral college.

I will absolutely blame the non-voters though. And the 3rd party voters still get part of the blame.

permalink
report
parent
reply
64 points
*

58% of the deciding power with just under 50% of the vote?

This might be a catalyst for states to sign the NPVIC. Pennsylvania started the process to sign on this week in legislature.

Perhaps in the past, swing states enjoyed the attention they got.

Now, I have a feeling voters are frustrated from getting way too much attention with mailers, calls, texts, illegal lotteries, news stories, events. As a bonus, voters in swing states are and will be getting outsized blame for electing the returning rapist-in-chief. Anyways a potential silver lining in the impending sea of shit.

permalink
report
reply
-14 points

Think about the NPVIC critically for a moment. What would you have done if your state voted for Harris, but some agreement your state legislators made forced your state’s EC votes to go to Trump? Suppose the margins were narrow enough that your state’s EC votes were the deciding factor.

I would be contacting my state representatives and governor immediately, demanding they withdraw from that compact before the EC votes are cast in December.

Trump voters would make similar demands of their state if the situation were reversed.

The NPVIC will never actually affect an election, because the participating states would almost certainly withdraw long before it did.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

There was some misinformation like that spread about Colorado this year, where more people voted Harris but the state assigned their electors to Trump. Only would happen if the compact is in force.

Thing is though, as it stands with the EC, neither party gives a shit about Colorado in elections as a 54/44 split is treated as a “given” for the Dems. With a national popular vote, every blue vote in Colorado or Washington, would matter just as much as a red vote in California, same as a blue vote in Oklahoma or a red vote in Montana.

Sure, people will try to call their reps and sue if they think their state could flip the result when EC doesn’t match the popular vote result. Those processes tend to take a long time that the chances of reversing it before January are slim. This election, it would have gone to Trump either way since he had a plurality of votes. Is it really fair that only 7 or 8 states of 50 had over 90% of the campaign visits, and nearly half had none?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You don’t have to convince me of the merits of bypassing the EC.

You do have to convince me that the NPVIC will remain in effect after one election. Yes, repealing something like this generally takes time, and probably longer than the 5 weeks or so between the election and the day the EC votes are cast. But they don’t have 5 weeks. They have the entire election cycle.

The only way it stays in effect is if it has no effect. If it would ever change the outcome of an election, it will be repealed by every state compelled to flip its votes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

Wasn’t it something like he only gained about 500,000 votes from the last primary election? The reason the Democrats lost was because they lost 10,000,000 due to people just straight up not voting for Kamala by either going 3rd party, switching to Trump, or abstaining. In my opinion it wasn’t really Trump’s popularity that won him the election but more of just the Democrats lack of popularity.

permalink
report
reply
32 points

Democrats lack of popularity, coupled with active voter suppression tactics in numerous states, four straight years of misinformation campaigns designed to decrease voter turnout and/or drive them to third parties maliciously, and most critically, no more covid lockdowns allowing people the free time to vote. People working full time wage jobs that are most likely to vote more blue are, quite intentionally, not financially allowed to vote in person due to work scheduling; 2020 was an outlier year.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points
*

OR, wait for it, it might be because Democrats absolutely suck at winning elections. It might be because no one likes them. And all that might be because they’re total fucking failures at governing.

“But muh libs have done such wonderful things and the GOP is the devil!”

SELL it to us then.

“But LOGIC!”

No one votes on logic. Sales class, before lunch, “People buy on emotion.”

Your post is exactly why libs so always fucking lose. Jesus, just say it out loud, “We lost because my pussy hurts!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You should seriously consider running for office. You might have the energy and wherewithal to reshape the liberal party into something halfway worthwhile 🤌

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Actually, Harris did nearly as well or better than Biden in the only states that matter, the swing states. In the ones the Harris didn’t beat Biden’s vote total, even if she had gotten it Trump would have still won the electoral college.

In other words, no it’s not because dems didn’t vote.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

I mean…. Does it really matter?

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Nope.

Some liberals will say that he won’t be able to claim a mandate. Doesn’t matter. He will.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Seriously, how far does that excuse get anyone? “Well everyone didn’t vote for him so whatever” and he says “Yeah they did 🥴” and proceeds to do whatever tf he wants anyway ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 463K

    Comments