Hillary Clinton won the popular vote; she had more votes than Donald Trump.
But, of course, she lost the electoral college vote, and she agreed to play by the rules. The electoral college, of course is the ultimate in election rigging: legal but rigged.
Those rules were established in the 18th century to avoid exactly the kind of President Donald Trump is: a rabble rouser to appeals to the unwashed, ignorant and passionate rather than the cooler heads of the ruling class. The people could vote, but the electors could over rule that vote if the rabble voted into someone the electors considered simply too reckless.
It's never worked that way.
So, after screaming for months about how the election would be rigged, Donald loses the vote but wins based on the established structure of rigging.
It should be noted the presence of the electoral college may well suppress votes in "safe states," and many voters in Alabama, Mississippi who would have made the effort to vote for Trump may have stayed home, knowing their state would go for Trump. The same is true for Maryland, California and New York, where voters bet Clinton would win.
And the bigger picture is that Trump's election would not mean as much if the House and Senate were in Democratic hands. The popular vote for Republican Congressmen is the real problem for Democrats, and that is not rigged--except by Gerrymander.
Who knows if you can trust any of the polling data, but exit polls suggest Latinos voted 30% for Trump and Blacks did not turn out in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin as they had for Obama, and that gave the Election to Trump.
So, you reap what you sow.
I'd like to check the lead levels in a lot of communities. Might explain some brain damage voting behavior.