Hillary Clinton’s popular vote victory doesn’t mean voters like her

Up by almost 2 million ballots with many still to count, Hillary Clinton will win the popular vote. But those trying to defend the Democrat’s candidacy and campaign are mistaken.

Article by Phillip Wegman

Ultimately, Clinton lost because she ran on an uninspiring message that could never overcome her unpopularity. The theme of her campaign was her own competence and seriousness compared to her opponent. People in flyover country wanted to hear about economic opportunity.

Election Day leftovers rolling in for Clinton are meaningless. Most of the incoming votes come from liberal strongholds like California, New York and Washington. But those late submissions won’t sway the election’s outcome and shouldn’t offer any consolation to depressed DNC staffers.

Victories in those deep blue states show that Clinton could generate a pulse, not that the 69-year old is popular. It’s been almost three decades since a Republican won the popular vote in those states. Clinging to Reagan’s coattails, President Bush was the last to do it, carrying California in 1988 by just 3 points.

Middle America, not coastal states, answered the popularity question definitively. Trump torched Clinton’s Midwest firewall, taking Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin and nearly snatching Minnesota as well. Clinton lost the election because she managed to lose three states where Al Gore and John Kerry had won.

On the other side of the ballot an opposite and easily observable phenomenon occurred. A fractured Republican party unified, not around Trump, but against Clinton. Over half of GOP voters said they were casting their ballots just to keep the former first lady from returning to the White House.

When all the votes are counted, Clinton will win the popular vote and lose the election because she delivered a losing message in the Midwest.

Philip Wegmann is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.

Read more at: washingtonexaminer.com