>Okay, do it by %. Trump lost the popular vote by 2.1%.

Given that the chatter section is going away, and for specific reasons - I'm trying my best to avoid the issues that led to the decision (personal attacks, etc.). And this is my final comment in the chatter form.

But I must say that I do not understand the preoccupation with a statistic that was never in play. The popular vote is only relevant if it's in play. It wasn't. Invoking a statistic that wasn't in play as a compelling argument is not a winning formula for that argument.

Yes, generally the popular vote will align with the electoral vote. We are clearly in a period of political turmoil and political change, and we had 2 candidates who were generally unpopular with the majority of Americans. Something of an anomaly was bound to happen.

Those who are not seeing this are, however innocently, falling into the very "denial" trap that they criticize on other topics (e.g. climate change denial).

I'm not saying the EC is 100% fine as is. No system is perfect. But any changes need to consider scenarios that could happen in 10-20 years - last thing we need is the EC shifting every time one political party feels it got slighted. That's partly why Congress is a mess right now. That also contributes to the class warfare that Bill F has correctly observed.

I think most everyone who has debated this topic (yourself included) has good intentions and wants the best for the country. I'm not inspired by the winner of this election any more than you are and I share some of the concerns.
But good systems, like good architectures, need more than just the current set of data points.

I'm done. :)

Happy holidays, everyone.