SpecialOlympian wrote:I used it as an example of defining popularity. More than half the voting population did not vote for Trump. He won the White House but lost the popularity contest.
If you are still struggling with this concept then you can view one of the many, many approval polls where Trump polls under 50%.
But the concept we're discussing has nothing to do with voting for someone, nor does it have anything to do with the electoral college (presumably where you were headed) and it has nothing to do with popularity. It has to do with the fact that you said he "is hated by more than half the people he meets."
It's simply impossible for you to prove that.
In our last Mayoral election, I voted for the incumbent; a Democrat (yes, it's true). I didn't "hate" her opponent, I just liked what she had been doing for our city, I liked the plans she had in place and I liked the direction she was taking the city.
Her opponent, a fine man in his own right, is someone who had some good ideas and some bad (as did the woman I voted for), but not enough for him to earn my vote. That's it. That's the long and short of it.
In your world, though, I guess that equates to "hate", and that's just a monumentally stupid thing to suggest.
It's understandable why you want to redirect the discussion, though. You realize that you're incapable of supporting what you said but, instead of simply demonstrating the strong character required to admit you were wrong, you suddenly want to talk about approval polls and popularity contests, which have exactly dick to do with your comment.
Not voting for someone doesn't automatically mean you hate them.
Yours was just a stupid statement, if for no other reason than you can't possibly support it. Therefore, it's wholly unworthy of even a passing consideration...
Courage is knowing that something will hurt and doing it anyway. Stupidity is the same thing. That's why life is hard...