[The Urban Sombrero]

Somehow I must have missed the point at which you left off from parroting the talking points and started making an argument of your own. It takes a lot more than a pocket pen organizer and weak deflection to break my train of thought. What you did say was that 'the public chose HRC', and that in spite of the fact that Trump got 306 electoral votes and the entirety of her popular vote advantage came from one state. There is your patently ridiculous. But if Hamlet's observation is accurate and brevity is indeed the soul of wit. Objectivity is certainly the focus that sharpens the objective. In point of fact I did not say wide and sweeping. What I said was completely different than your incorrect quote but then, this is not the first time your failing with regard to reading comprehension has let you down, publicly. I said valid and sweeping.

In 2008 Barack Obama carried 28 states, in 2012 only 26. That did not stop Dems from claiming a mandate in 2012 and a "mandate for change" in 2008. This time Trump carried 30 states and Clinton only 20. I don't believe he would have won if not for the Democrat crossover vote. In that limited sense depending on ones argument, he has at least a limited mandate thanks to Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina and Florida Trumpocrats. Further, 42% of women, 29% of Hispanics and NBC says 8% of blacks voted for Trump. Better than Romney and good enough to send Democrats into apoplectic shock.

And let's get something straight, your posts are hardly chiseled in granite at the foot of a holy mountain. You always forego factual evidence in favor of a personal swipe at me which admittedly, is all you got, other than feelings I guess. But not to despair, I understand a slot has opened up on 'The View', you might want to check it out.

Ah, TRT, you do have keyboard diarrhea. You know full well you were implying Trump has some sort of big mandate. Now, your revised "limited mandate" I can see somewhat. As per "The View," at those salaries, I might apply.

The "factual evidence" is that HRC won the popular vote. My point was not that she won the election, nor that a recount is needed, nor that the Russians cost HRC the election. My suggestion was only that your characterization of some sort of big mandate was inaccurate hyperbole. And it was. However, your revision is more accurate.