Quote:
Originally Posted by mineistaken
Firstly: I am not saying it does, I am saying it is pretty special to win with only 38% of popular vote (and even more special if even removing Cali you still win). So it is not about mattering, it is about it being pretty a unique case. You may not see another one like that in your lifetime 
Secondly: you raise a great point of once again exposing libby double standard - they did not cry that Clinton won "unfair" with 38% like they do with Trump with 48%. |
Where are you getting these numbers?
In 1992:
Clinton - 43.01% of the vote
Bush - 37.45% of the vote
Perot - 18.91% of the vote
In 1996:
Clinton - 49.2% of the vote
Dole - 40.7% of the vote
Perot - 8.4%
There was no crying about Clinton not winning the majority of the popular vote because he did.
It's not a unique case. Since 1960 there have been 5 Democrats and 6 Republicans (counting Trump) elected President. JFK lost California and still won easily. Clinton, Obama, and Johnson all won with big enough margins they could have given the Republicans Cali and still won. 4 out of 5 is not a special case.