Will Trump win the most votes for president for the third time in 2024?

[Kelley1]

Updates

+1 y

If RFK Jr, wins enough votes so that neither Trump nor Biden has a majority, who wins the election?

[Sirenboobzilla]

That's not accurate. 2016 he lost the popular vote, but he had the swing states in his favor. 2020 he lost both. Until someone can prove that the democrats ACTUALLY cheated, he lost and has to get over it.

As for 2024, it does seem like he'll pull a win. Don't see the left with any real strong opposition

[Anonymous]

No one in America wanted Joe and Kamala. Guess what? They won. Votes don't matter. What matters is who counts the votes.

[Opinion Owner]

Thanks for the MHO

[DJB72]

I still think it's a 3 way election. RFK Jr may just be able to upset the apple cart.

If it's a fair process it's possible he might take the White House

[Kelley1]

It will not be fair. The single party democrat-republican's control the media and people as the media instructs.

[DJB72]

They said JFK couldn't win so maybe...

If he's on the ballot in all 50 states he's got a good chance. I'm surprised the Dems didn't give him the nomination and quietly retire Coma-Joe

[SixFootSexy]

Still relevant

Yeah he's probably going to win. I wish we had someone with something to lose rather than just electing someone out to get revenge, but that's how it goes.

[itsclearlynicholas]

Personally I'm disappointed and let down by all the nominees who are running, see I was hoping Sarah Palin, then I was hoping Marianne Williamson, and now once again and I'm not an American anyhow, it's down to another rematch of Biden and Trump or Trump and Biden. What a disappointing bunch of options sigh...👀👀😅

[itsclearlynicholas]

And if the world is secretly controlled by puppet masters or lobbyists, lol, then those such influencers pick such boring stars for soap operas that is politics worldwide. Sigh. 😉😉🤣

[goaded]

I prefer leaders who are boring and get things done.

[exitseven]

Yes, the only thing that will stop him is a bullet. I watched him last night at the town hall in SC and it was apparent that the Secret Service is taking his protection very seriously.

[Jennz6]

@exitseven maybe true, but I don’t want to think about it

[exitseven]

@Jennz6 me neither. If people think Jan6th was a big deal I imagine it will look like a Sunday school picnic

[Iron_Man]

Do you really think Trump can win? That’s great. I want Biden out of there r

[Jennz6]

@Iron_Man yes unless he’s put in jail for one of those crimes that said he did but I think it’s a lot of bologna

[Iron_Man]

@Jennz6 Awesome

[exitseven]

@Iron_Man the last poll has him ahead in all 7 so called swing states. Some he leads by double digits. He is catching up to Biden in New York. He plans on campaigning in New York. i don't think they can steal it again

[Jennz6]

20 more states soon

[Iron_Man]

This is great

[abc3643]

I wouldn't assassinate Trump nor am I advocating it.
However, assassinating him would not be difficult.

Lesson to be learned from "The Godfather, Part II"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dWE_ag9W6o

America is a reactive country, not a proactive one. It waits for problems and crises to be foisted upon it before it does anything. And new ways of killing people are always being invented.

[abc3643]

He didn't win the most votes either time; that is, he lost the "popular vote" in both the 2016 and 2020 elections.

He won the most Electoral College votes in 2016.

[abc3643]

Response to update:

"If RFK Jr, wins enough votes so that neither Trump nor Biden has a majority, who wins the election?"

To win the presidency, the candidate must win the majority of Electoral College (EC) votes. There are a total of 538 EC votes; this is determined by summing the total number of House members, the total number of Senators, and 3 as if Washington DC was a state with 1 House member and 2 Senators.
So:
435 House
+
100 Senate
+
3
=
538

Thus, to win the Presidency, a candidate must have at least 270 EC votes since 538/2 = 239 which is exactly half and thus not a majority.

(more)

[abc3643]

The answer to your question though is rooted in the Constitution. At first, it was under Article II, Section 1, Clause 3, however, the 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, effectively rewrote that clause with some slight tweaks. Then, the 20th Amendment tweaked the 12th only slightly.

In short, this is what would happen assuming RFK Jr., Trump, and Biden all had less than 270 EC votes, BUT had more EC votes than anyone else... (No one else would likely get any EC votes anyway.)

Under the 12th Amendment, the top 3 EC vote-getters are then the 3 candidates that will immediately be voted upon by the House of Representatives. That would be Biden, Trump, and RFK Jr.

Now, what is NOT in the 12th Amendment, but that is critical is that this would occur on January 6th which is only 3 days after the new Congress has started. So, who has the majority in the House after the 2024 Election is pretty much going to determine who the President is going to be.

But, it's not that simple.

The House doesn't just vote with each of the 435 Representatives having a vote. Instead, there would be a vote of the 50 states. That makes things interesting. So, a state like California has a few dozen Representatives and they would internally have to come to a conclusion as to who California will vote for President. Similarly, a state like Wyoming which has only one Representative will simply vote for President, but as Wyoming. So, in this case, Representatives in the House do not have equal weight. (This would likely help the GOP.)

Furthermore, there have to be at least 2/3rd of the states voting, so that means 34 states would have to be present to vote. (This is trivial since likely all states would have their representatives present.)

It gets more convoluted after that if the House doesn't select the new President.

(more)

[abc3643]

Now, remember, this would be the next Congress doing that vote. That would be the 119th Congress. The current Congress is the 118th. Let's assume things don't change and look at each state:
AL : R (that is, the majority of House members from AL are Republican)
AK : D
AZ : R
AR : R
CA : D
CO : D
CT : D
DE : D
FL : R
GA : R
HI : D
ID : R
IL : D
IN : R
IA : R
KS : R
KY : R
LA : R
ME : D
MD : D
MA : D
MI : D
MN : split evenly
MS : R
MO : R
MT : R
NE : R
NV : D
NH : D
NJ : D
NM : D
NY : D
NC : split evenly
ND : R
OH : R
OK : R
OR : D
PA : D
RI : D
SC : R
SD : R
TN : R
TX : R
UT : R
VT : D
VA : D
WA : D
WV : R
WI : R
WY : R

SO, ...
That's 26 states that have a majority of Representatives as Republican and
22 states that have a majority of Representatives as Democrats and
2 states that are evenly split.

With a 4 state differential, even if the two evening split states - Minnesota and North Carolina - were to vote for the Democrat, the 26 states voting for the Republican would mean the Republican would be elected as President.

HOWEVER, one thing is clear: RFK Jr. would not survive a House vote since he's an independent. Really, an independent / third party candidate needs to win the EC vote outright to become President because once Congress gets involved, the two established parties will preclude the independent from winning.

[goaded]

Thanks for the comprehensive summary. You've just described what Trump tried to achieve on Jan 6 with his fake electors and, finally, attack on the Capitol, and why right wing billionaires are propping up RFK.

A regular speaker at CPAC (albeit not a headliner, this year), Jack Posobiec: "I just wanted to say welcome to the end of democracy. We're here to overthrow it completely."

"We didn't get all the way there on January 6th, but we will endeavor to get rid of it and replace it with this right here. We'll replace it with this right here."
[Holding up his fist, or maybe a small cross.]

"Amen! That's right, because all glory, all glory is not to government, all glory to God."

I won't be holding my breath waiting for condemnations from anyone there.

https://embed.crooksandliars.com/embed/fnDHKE4z

The only funny bit is the guy pretending that Posobiec's joking, because he knows how bad it sounds. He's not joking; they proved that on Jan 6.

[Kelley1]

@abc3643 Thank you for your splendid answer. However, it doesn't seem fair that that the 10 largest population states with a population of 181,753,560 and 18.6 times the population has the same voting power as the ten smallest states with a population 9,777,906.

[goaded]

Of course it's not fair, which is why Trump intends to use the military to put down protests. They want to change the country into Russia.

"Donald Trump and his allies have begun mapping out specific plans for using the federal government to punish critics and opponents should he win a second term, with the former president naming individuals he wants to investigate or prosecute and his associates drafting plans to potentially invoke the Insurrection Act on his first day in office to allow him to deploy the military against civil demonstrations."
www.washingtonpost.com/.../

[abc3643]

@Kelley1
It's fair and it's not.
You are right.
At the same time, when the Constitution was enacted, the Electoral College and how the election for President was something of a compromise.

Here's a good lesson in life:
People are very reluctant to give up any power or freedom. You really have to make it worth their while and give them "rights" that protect them when they have given up that power and freedom.
People do not come together on their own...

So, when the US was founded, we initially had a confederation with a weak national government. Really, the US wasn't a true country - it was more like the EU.
Well, history shows again and again that confederations never work out. This is because, at some point, a member of that confederation will, sooner or later realize that what the confederation wants is not what that member feels is in its best interests, so it asserts it decides to leave the confederation and regain its independence and freedom.
Example: Brexit, the UK leaving the EU.

(more)

[abc3643]

Thus, the Founding Fathers (FF) scraped the national government under the Articles of Confederation and gave us the Constitution with a strong national government. But, to do that, the first compromise had to be that states retained their existence. This is why the US is a federation and not a unitary nation like France and most other nations.

With a federation, the states give up some independence and freedom and power for the greater good because they know that the unity of being bonded together with the others in the federation also helps protect them in times of crisis. This is where "united we stand" comes from.

At the same time, states don't want to give up everything...

So, when the Federal Government was formed, the small states (in population) wanted equal power with the big states. So, when it came to building Congress, the FF created the Senate which is primarily responsible for things at a national level like treaties, ambassadors, cabinet appointments, impeachment trials, all sorts of stuff that, more or less, affect everyone uniformly. In the Senate, the states have the same amount at stake, so they want equal "buy-in" - a voice on what is determined. Furthermore, Senators are elected to 6 years to provide stability and wisdom with experience. It's supposed to be the adult in the room.

But, the FF also created the House of Representatives and it is primarily responsible for things that are "closer to home" and more directly affect individuals. This is why the states do not have equal weight but the people are, more or less, weighed equally by having representatives with each representative supposedly representing so many people... The House is the body that introduces bills involving money and a lot of other things. Since House members are elected only every 2 years, they are more beholden to the voters' will and moods. It's the whiny kids in the room.

(more)

[abc3643]

So, if you think about it...
The legislative body for the states is the Senate.
The legislative body for the people is the House of Representatives.
And the FF made sure that BOTH had to agree to enact legislation.

But there's only one President who is both a President for the states and a President for the people.
Thus, the President needs to be elected in a way in which the states vote for the President but also the people vote for the President.
Thus, the Electoral College was born which combines the votes from the states and the votes from the people.
And because people are the real voters, the House is given deference in the case of a tie.

Keep in mind that, long ago, the members of the Senate were elected by state legislatures, not elected by the people directly. The 17th Amendment changed that.

(more)

[abc3643]

===
All of that said, many people want to ban the Electoral College and that's understandable. Personally, I don't have a problem with the Electoral College BUT I do have a problem with the House. The House was originally supposed to have 1 Representative for every 30000=3*10^4 people.

From Article I Section 2:
" The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one Representative"

235 years ago, this was not a problem. The country has grown a lot since. With a population of about 300 million = 3*10^8, that would mean 3*10^8/3*10^4 = 10^4=10,000 Representatives. Can you imagine what the House would be like with 10,000 Representatives? And that number always changing based on population growth so you need to keep adding offices and buildings etc. So, the Reapportionment Act of 1929 was created capping the House at (eventually) 435 Representatives. To me, this is a major problem because large population states get screwed while small ones benefit greatly.

(more)

[abc3643]

Look at...
California:
It has 52 and a 2020 population of 39.37 million.
So, 39.37*10^6 / 52 = over 757115 people per representative
Wyoming:
It has 1 Representative and a 2020 population of 582,328.
So, 582,328 people per Representative

That's bad enough, but now what about EC votes?
California has 54 EC votes, but Wyoming has 3.
So, how many people per EC vote?
California: 39.37*10^6/54 = 692222.222
Wyoming: 582,328/3 = 194109.333
194109.333 / 692222.222 = 0.2804
That means, from the perspective of electing the President, a Wyoming voter has almost 4 times the power of the California voter.
That's wrong; it violates the long-held "one-person, one-vote" principle in the US.
Of course, the very nature of the Electoral College does that, but it should not be this egregious. So, I think the House ought to be expanded considerably. Given the Internet age, House members could work

For homework not to hand in...
Compute what the Electoral College power of a California and Wyoming voter would be if the House of Representatives tripled in size (so CA would have 156 Representatives and WY would have 3).

[Kelley1]

I don't know what EC is. However, I don't see that two votes out of 435 makes any significant difference.

[Kelley1]

After looking at, it balances out. Wyoming has an advantage but South Dakota and Vermont penalized. Therefore, on balance neither the small nor the large state have an advantage. It just has a bigger effect on small population states due to rounding.

[goaded]

EC is the Electoral College. States send their EC voters to DC to cast their votes for president. It's a hold-over from when it took days or weeks for people to get there, so they were allowed great freedom to make choices when they got there, in case a candidate died in the meantime or something like that.

These days, they're generally required to vote according to the votes in their states.

[abc3643]

EC = Electoral College.
It most definitely makes a difference; if it didn't, then the Electoral College never would have existed.

In short, my point is, that with more Representatives in the House, the Electoral College will more closely align with the popular vote which it generally has with rare exception until the past 25 years.

There have been 59 Presidential elections since the first one in 1788.
In the intervening 232 years (1788 to 2020), only 5 Presidential elections had the winner of the popular vote lost the election in the Electoral College.
That's about 8.47%.
Before 2000, there were only 3 such elections.
Yet, since, we've had 6 Presidential elections with 2 such elections.
That's 33.33% which is not quite 4 times the frequency in the previous 212 years.

That's not good and is pissing a lot of people off.

[abc3643]

TYPO CORRECTION:

So, I think the House ought to be expanded considerably. Given the Internet age, House members could work from their home districts thus being closer to the people they represent.

[goaded]

That's not a bad idea!

[Kelley1]

I can see how that would be good. Currently, you can't speak to your congressman and if you write a letter it is be ignored. However, since a few votes would make a difference if he represented 30,000 people about 15,000 voters (Maybe 7,000 since half don't vote). Likely, you could speak to him and your letter wouldn't be ignored.

[abc3643]

Well, every Congressman "comes home". That's one reason why there are breaks in Congress like over Christmastime and for a time in the summer.
Every Congressman has a home office too that he or she likely visits during trips home.

Now, if I am correct, you live or are from Arkansas's 4th Congressional District and your current Congressman is Republican Bruce Westerman who's been in office for 9 years and is not quite 5 years younger than me.
So, where's his office?
Well, besides his office in Washington DC, he has 3 offices in his district:
In Hot Springs (where he lives), Pine Bluff, and El Dorado.
https://westerman.house.gov/contact/offices
You can call his office and maybe schedule a meeting with him OR fill-out this form:
westerman.house.gov/contact/request-an-appearance
He seems like a decent guy and I bet he'd appreciate meeting a smart young lady like yourself.

[RainbowMarinade]

Umm…. he needs to get the most votes for the first and second time before he can get them for a third time though. 🤔

[Anonymous]

Given the number of voters (Democrat, Swing/Independent, and \republican) that The "Biden" Administration has pissed off over the last 4 years I'd say that Trump has a high chance of being voted in as President, with any Democrat and RINO's (Congress or Senate) who are up for re-election are going to be in for one hell of a fight to remain in office.

[FightingDwyer]

He's gonna win, barring something really underhanded and obvious. Nothing they've tried or done to railroad him has diminished his popularity. In fact it's only made it stronger and increased his fan base.

[snowboarder720]

Seeing that Trump hasn’t ever won the most votes I’d say no; He’s never won the popular vote. He won by the electoral college and was impeached twice.

[Kelly6]

@Kelley1 in USA it’s never about how much vote they get.

public votes are mostly useless

[Dargil]

Electoral votes? Yes. Popular votes, no because of mail in ballot fraud.

[snowboarder720]

He’s now a convicted criminal and lost his best friend Jeffrey Epstein. At this point his fan base won’t ever stop supporting him. 🤣🤣

[Dargil]

@snowboarder720 Of course you can support "Epstein" . Oh. Ok.. Everybody Epstein knew was his best friend, right?

TDS in full flower, here.

[andreasderjuengere]

This is one interesting local quarrel to look at.
If the WORLD would be asked to vote for or against Trump
-just so, and for the 'fun'-
he would notice how unwanted he really is.

[NamerOfStars]

No- he didn't in 2016 or 2020, so if it happens- and it might!- it'd be the first.

[normalice]

He has never won the most votes. The reason you have to lie is because there are no facts to back you.

[genericname85]

well if the alternative is sleepy joe, then he 100% will. cause biden is OBVIOUSLY not in the bodily shape to be a president right now, let alone for another term.

[DextroShade]

He is going to win against Biden and the Democrats can't replace him so they are desperately waging lawfare against Trump to bankrupt him and lock him up.

[Surely]

The Democrats will need to print enough extra Biden ballots to win!
This country can not survive another four years of Brandon!

[shortster]

In the event that nobody has enough electoral college votes it goes to the House. And maybe the Senate too; I don't know for sure. I'll have to check my copy of the Constitution.

[shortster]

Okay, just the House votes, but they vote by state (one vote for each state).

[SolitarySolace]

Yes, he would. That is if Democrats don’t cheat and women couldn’t vote

[goaded]

That's not the argument you think it is.

[Lyndsielee666]

Yikes dude

[goaded]

@Lyndsielee666 There really are people out there who want to eliminate over a century of progress. And they're influentual and powerful.

www.rightwingwatch.org/.../

[Lyndsielee666]

@goaded real odd how these people don’t want women to have rights when they literally came out of one.

[Slapmynuts]

Absolutely! Trump won the 2020 election by the total of 100 million votes to 40 million! This time it will be greater!

[Filthy_Immigrant]

How the fuck did Biden get 42%?


Are people actually voting for this assclown?

[legalboxers]

[Paris13]

IF NO CHEATING!!! xxoo

[standardguy]

Biden won't make a coalition with Robert Kennedy Jr.

[electromagnetic]

Good for him if he does.

[Jennz6]

YESS, GO TRUMP

[FunkyMonkee]

He sure will!!

[Vegasrunner]

That's not possible in 2024.

[CuriousMufuxka]

Grover Cleveland 2.0

[TallAnon]

Probably, sounds like America

[austinbooth]

I hope he does

[Anonymous]

Trump 2024!

[BarryLiverstone]

Nope

[Deserter2]

Trump is the goat

[Slim57]

Prolly

[Anonymous]

Yes 👏