Originally Posted by
ItalAussie
"Popular vote" isn't irrelevant. It doesn't undermine the legitimacy of Trump's win, which was fair and completely valid under the rules. But you don't just rule for your own voters. If you sweep 60% of the vote and 40 states, there's no reason to hold back even a little bit from implementing your ideas, because it seems like the country in general approves. But if it's razor thin, you have to remember that there's a huge portion of the population that disagrees with your proposals, and that's a good reason to at least look at some kind of meeting in the middle (skewed to your side, which is fair given the result).
Politics isn't just about winning, despite the fact that it's turned increasingly tribal in the last 20 years. You govern for all the voters, not just the ones who voted for you. A popular vote loss suggests that an effective leader should probably reach out and find some sort of middle ground. Nobody is suggesting Trump should concede his position and go home. But they're suggesting that it's not the campaign anymore; he should remember that most of the country aren't Republican voters, and find a way to implement his plans which doesn't alienate his own populace.
Effective politics shouldn't just be "win or bust". But it's become practically a sporting event now. You only have to look at how particularly dogmatic members of one side or the other basically jerk off at the idea of their ideological opponents being unhappy. That's simply not a healthy way to govern, even though it's satisfying on an individual level.