this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2026
68 points (100.0% liked)
Conservative
492 readers
11 users here now
We are a community dedicated to discussion surrounding the political right.
People of all political views are welcome here, but we expect a high level of discussion from everyone.
Rules:
-Good Faith participation only.
-Stay on topic.
-Follow instance rules.
-Only post news articles with the original headlines.
-Please interact with this community if you want to downvote.
-Absolutely no homophobia, transphobia or misgendering anyone.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, but a plurality did.
A plurality did not.
~77 milion out of 265 million - Trump
~75 million out of 265 million - Harris
~113 million out of 265 million - Nether
Getting a plurality of votes cast =/= a plurality of voters
It's how fascism has risen in the past as well. Chasing a minority of voters because they can win an election should be an alarm bell.
Every democratic system should engage a high turnout and require a majority, not just a plurality.
80% turnout should be a norm.
Personally I am in favour of mandatory voting, with the caveat that the bottom of the ballot should have a "none of the above" option. Australia gets a ~90% turnout.
Single Transferable Vote is the best election method as it avoids wasted votes in multi party democracies.
You're correct, a majority of people who voted voted for him, not a plurality. Way too many people, in any event!
if we believe their counts