I'm trying to have a conversation with you. I'm presenting factual information. I was there. I saw the numbers. You can continue to believe the other narrative, or we can have a conversation.

It's not a narrative! The election was literally not a landslide. Vote numbers are available everywhere in all sorts of level of detail.

This is a conversation. Disagreeing with you doesn't make it something else.

I did not say it was a landslide. I said, "it looked like it to me before the election because I'm seeing crazy numbers for Trump and a handful for Hillary".

The media was not talking about what was staring me in the face. I'm not a journalist. I don't know what it meant, but to me, I thought, "wow, a landslide is coming".

Can I have an opinion?

Of course you can have an opinion. My question to you is: will you be introspective about it?

You thought it was going to be a landslide because you only exposed yourself to--or only believed--information that reinforced that opinion.

Now that you know it wasn't a landslide, will you go back and look at where your opinion diverged from reality? Or will you just think "I was right after all" simply because Trump won?

Ahh okay. I understand you now.

You are correct, I am in shock that it was not a landslide because of what I thought I was seeing at the time.

I'm in technology (I assume you are too) so I went about doing simple data sampling online. I did not care what my local state was doing, I wanted national data. Something that would hopefully give me real insight. What I found (in my non-professional way) was that Trump had an overwhelmingly large number of people interested in him from both live events as well as more static events. The people present seemed more excited as well. She also had more negative online information available about her.

From that, I developed a theory that Trump would win in a landslide.

Thank you for the conversation.

Cool, thank you too.