Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

818

Trump won 2016 with 6% of the black vote, 28% of the Hispanic vote, and 54% of the white vote. According to the , in 2020 Trump received 35% of the Hispanic vote, 8% of the black vote, and 55% of the white vote. The puts it even higher: 11% black, 32% Hispanic, and 58% white.

Trump supposedly lost the election because of losing heavily black cities in Michigan, Georgia, and Pennsylvania. There's no mathematical way that those two things can be reconciled. It doesn't matter how many voters turned out. If a larger percentage voted for Trump than in 2016, his margin of victory should be increased from 2016 by the same amount.

What am I missing?

Trump won 2016 with 6% of the black vote, 28% of the Hispanic vote, and 54% of the white vote. According to the [WSJ](https://www.wsj.com/graphics/votecast-2020/), in 2020 Trump received 35% of the Hispanic vote, 8% of the black vote, and 55% of the white vote. The [New York Times ](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/exit-polls-president.html)puts it even higher: 11% black, 32% Hispanic, and 58% white. Trump supposedly lost the election because of losing heavily black cities in Michigan, Georgia, and Pennsylvania. There's no mathematical way that those two things can be reconciled. It doesn't matter how many voters turned out. If a larger percentage voted for Trump than in 2016, his margin of victory should be increased from 2016 by the same amount. What am I missing?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (55).
[–] • 0 pt

Says something is statistically impossible.

Provides zero statistics.

[–] • 1 pt

I figure anyone worth debating it with doesn't need it spelled out in crayon. You try it yourself. Make this equation true:

0.06B + 0.28H + 0.54W < 0.08B + 0.35H + 0.55W

[–] • 0 pt

Lol "I can't do the math so YOU prove how I'm right"

Maybe you should use your crayons to learn stats before looking like a nigger

(I'll give you a hint, you're combining percentages of subpopulations as though they're percentages of the total population. Obviously this is saying whites are being replaced...)

[–] • 0 pt

I'll give you a hint, you're combining percentages of subpopulations as though they're percentages of the total population

I'm adding them as if the total is the total percentage of the population. If we know that 20% of X and 30% of Y add up to 25% of X+Y, we know that X and Y must be equal. If they aren't, the equality is false. Hopefully that's clear. Now, use that principle with the election results.

0.08B + 0.35H + 0.55W = 0.477(B + H + W)

In other words, 8% of the black vote + 35% of the Hispanic vote + 55% of the rest has to add up to 47.7% of the total popular vote. That establishes the relationship among the variables even if we don't know what those variables are. It means that the number of voters not Hispanic or black has to be 5.44 times as many as black voters, and 1.74 times as many as Hispanic voters. Since we know Trump's official popular vote was 74,216,154, we know that has to mean 7,761,600 black votes, 24,255,900 Hispanic votes, and 42,198,700 white/Asian votes (with rounding errors).

If 7,761,600 is 8% of the black vote, that means there were over 97 million black voters. Likewise, if 24,255,900 is 35% of the Hispanic vote, that means there are over 69 million Hispanic voters. The white/Asian proportion works out to 76 million white/Asian voters. Something is very wrong. The Hispanic population is "close enough" if you figure that the percentages are off by 5% plus or minus, but those black and white numbers are off the charts wrong ... by more than a factor of 2.

What am I doing wrong?