Debunking the Myth of His Victory

While others may be celebrating the huge victory of the new President, my writing here is to ascertain that D. J. Drumpf did not win the election so much as Hillary Clinton lost the election.

I ascertain that Clinton lost three key states that had voted for the Democrat in the past six presidential elections. This trio of states held 44 votes in the Electoral College that were more than enough to tip the election towards the Republican in 2016.

Those states are Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

I ascertain that it is not that Drumpf won those states, but Clinton lost them. For my proof, I will use the number of votes cast in the 2012 and 2016 elections.

In Michigan, in 2012, Mitt Romney garnered 2,115,256 votes (44.71%). In 2016, according to the data from Politco, Drumpf received 2,279,221 votes (47.6%), an increase of 163,965 (0r +7.75%). For the other party, in 2012, Barack Obama received 2,564,569 votes (54.21%). Four years later, Clinton received 2,267,798 (47.3%), a decrease of 296,771 (or -11.57%) votes.

Had Clinton received the same number of votes in Michigan that Obama received in 2012, she would have won the state and its 16 votes in the Electoral College. In fact, Clinton’s tally of votes in Michigan was less than the number of votes given to the Democratic presidential nominee in the past three presidential elections (2012, 2008 (2,872,579), 2004 (2,479,183)).

In Michigan, Drumpf grew the Republican vote total while Clinton’s numbers shrank. It’s not that people who voted Democratic in past elections went for Drumpf as his vote tally only grew by single digits based on percentage; it’s that people who voted Democratic in past elections did not come out for Clinton as her vote count decreased by double digits based on percentage.

In Ohio, in 2012, Romney, garnered 2,661,433 votes (47.69%). In 2016, Drumpf received 2,771,984 votes (52.1%), an increase of 110,501 (or +4.15%). For the Democrat, in 2012, Obama received 2,827,710 votes (50.67%). Four years later, Clinton received 2,317,001 votes (43.5%), a decrease of 510,709 (or -18.06%) votes.

Had Clinton received the same number of votes in Ohio that Obama received in 2012, she would have won the state and its 18 votes in the Electoral College. In fact, Clinton’s tally of votes in Ohio was less than the number of votes given to the Democratic presidential nominee in the past three presidential elections (2012, 2008 (2,940,044), 2004 (2,741,167)).

In Ohio, Drumpf grew the Republican vote total while Clinton’s numbers shrank. It’s not that people who voted Democratic in past elections went for Drumpf as his vote tally only grew by single digits based on percentage; it’s that people who voted Democratic in past elections did not come out for Clinton as her vote count decreased by double digits based on percentage.

In Wisconsin, in 2012, Romney garnered 1,407,966 votes (46.04%). In 2016, Drumpf received 1,409,467 votes (47.9%), a increase of 1,501 votes (or +0.1%). For the Democrat, in 2012, Obama received 1,620,985 votes (53.01%). Four years later, Clinton received 1,382,210 votes (46.9%), a decrease of 238,775 votes (or -14.73%).

Had Clinton received the same number of votes in Wisconsin that Obama received in 2012, she would have won the state and its 10 votes in the Electoral College. In fact, Clinton’s tally of votes in Wisconsin was less than the number of votes given to the Democratic presidential nominee in the past three presidential elections (2012, 2008 (1,677,211), 2004 (1,489,504)).

In Wisconsin, Drumpf grew the Republican vote total (albeit slightly) while Clinton’s numbers shrank. It’s not that people who voted Democratic in past elections went for Drumpf as his vote tally barely ticked up; it’s that people who voted Democratic in past elections did not come out for Clinton as her vote count decreased by double digits based on percentage.

That’s my contention. In these three states that were the cinder blocks of the “Blue Wall”, there was an “enthusiasm gap” where voters who had selected the Democrat in 2012 did not do the same in 2016. It’s not that they voted for Republican. They either sat it out or voted for a third-party candidate. It’s not that “Reagan Democrats” or “angry white men” came out in unexpected droves in those states to tip the balance for Drumpf. It’s that the members of the “Obama Coalition” did not come out in droves to support Clinton.

Had this “enthusiasm gap” been turned around even slightly and those 44 votes in the Electoral College held by MI, OH, and WI swing away from Drumpf and towards Clinton. Those votes would have been enough to make her the President-elect.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s