>>153377>What did he mean by this
I meant that more people voted Democrat for POTUS, despite the dems running the least popular Democrat in living history, against a "poor man's Reagan".
I meant that most more people voted Democrat for Senators, but the Republicans are more popular in the tiny little flyover states. The twenty smallest states have a combined population smaller than California, but hold twenty time as as man y seats in the Senate.
That's right, 12% of the population elects 40% of the Senate.
In the House? OK, grand total, the Republicans have a 1% lead (by votes), but only because they've gerrymandered so many districts to the point where the Dems don't even run a candidate.
But when they have a choice, once again, most people vote Democrat.
But let's take a closer look at the EC and the POTUS race.
The GOP hasn't had a non-incumbent win the popular vote since 1980, and only two such wins since the 1920's, unless you count Nixon's 43% "win" in 1968 when the Dems split the vote and ran two candidates.
Most people still voted Democrat though.
So their only two real wins in nearly a century are Reagan and Eisenhower, and Ike was practically a communist compared to modern Republicans.
And let's not forget that all the people that stayed home in November were told "If you don't vote, Hillary will surely win!".
Like it or not, the Dems are "America's Team", and the Republicans are the bad guys.