Most of the people confidently predicting a Trump landslide are going to be wrong no matter what because they're specifically predicting "another Trump landslide" or "a second Trump landslide", when he barely eked out a win in 2016.
A piece of logic I've seen echoed around is "How is 320 electoral votes not a landslide when you only need 270?"
And it's like, take your pick:
1. Most winners get more.
2. You can't assemble them 1 by 1 so it's hard to get exactly 270.
3. Most people voted against him.
And it's like, take your pick:
1. Most winners get more.
2. You can't assemble them 1 by 1 so it's hard to get exactly 270.
3. Most people voted against him.
And as soon as you bring up "How can you call it a landslide when he lost the popular vote?" then that just triggers the automated reply of "THE POPULAR VOTE DOESN'T MATTER UNDER OUR SYSTEM, THE WINNER IS WHOEVER TAKES THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE."... but we're talking about landslides
If you can call it a landslide when most people voted against you and you got fewer electoral votes than most winners do, then the word "landslide" has lost all meaning.
And under that logic, sure, he got a landslide. So did I. So my cat. A landslide is anything and nothing.
And that's Trumpism, isn't it? Words mean nothing, they're either good words or bad words. The good words apply to Trump; the bad words to his enemies.
And that's Trumpism, isn't it? Words mean nothing, they're either good words or bad words. The good words apply to Trump; the bad words to his enemies.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
