The half that didn't vote, voted to let the other side decide.
Because surely the half that didn't vote wouldn't have voted for him either. So really, when you think about it, 75% of the country voted for Clinton.
... wat? You cant just count nonvoters for your candidate. They chose not to vote as a way to say your candidate sucks.
Well you obviously missed the sarcasm. I was making fun of the stupidity of the "ACKSHUALLY only 25% of the country voted for him" argument, which is needless pedantry and ignores that we can infer how the rest of the country _likely_ would have voted since we have such a large sample size.
You realize that {people who voted} is no where near an independent random sample and has far less power than its size suggests?