As usual you make some great and terrible points here. Many that may have given it to Clinton haven't voted. Scores of Americans have issues with their residence as some live in a state which they aren't really registered to which means according to my Yankee colleague that they'd have to travel back to vote. How many of those 100 mil do you think are established well enough to travel and angry enough to support the disrespectful maniac Donald? Had all those voted, Hillary wouldn't just have 3 but 10 million more votes than Donald the Duck. The lesson isn't "don't assume" but make yourself available for the day so that your nation doesn't have to suffer under an unqualified/inexperienced nutcase. Does a sound education supported by relevant to the job experience and a truly native American backgound (Obama's mother) make the man "a moron"? Or, does a lame BA in economy followed by real estate manipulations qualify one to be smart enough to drive the powerful nation forward? Wouldn't it be better to distinguish in between complaining, observing and providing constructive criticism? The bottom line is that the United States isn't united, the nation's democracy is corrupt and the electoral college disgraceful.

The thing you are forgetting is that Clinton could have won under this "terrible" Electoral College system. How many people eligible to vote didnot vote in the US election? 100 million?

I think Hillary supporters did not vote in greater numbers because they just assumed she would win. The lesson is: don't assume you will win!

And I think Obama is a moron, but he was right when he said VOTE, VOTE! If you don't bother voting don't complain about the outcome.