So when Trump wins the popular vote on election day, but then Biden wins ...

Here is the strawman that you are creating. You are trying to make what I say as a claim of an election system. That is nowhere near what I am claiming. The popular vote is a metric of measurement that indicates how many individuals voted, past tense, for each candidate. It is NOT the process of them casting their votes, i.e. a voting system. It is a metric of measurement that can be expressed on a voting district level, a state level or a national level. If voting districts were isolated to counties, then it could be expressed on a county level as well. Hell we could even group the various states by the first letter in their name and measure the popular vote of those groups. It would be a metric of measurement no matter what system was used, with the exception of any that doesn't allow the general population to vote at all. System A will not have the same results as system B, and the national popular vote under each system would be different.

Think of it this way. The popular vote is like a radar gun at a speed track. The results of a lamborgini going full out will be different than a Scion iQ going full out. But both can have their speed measured in MPH or KPH. The same measurement for different results. The popular vote will be the same measurement regardless of system, and will get different results for each system.

If you are going to conflate a metric of measurement with a system of election, then there really isn't any hope for you. Until you can show basic comprehension, this can't go any further.

 

None of the bolded exist I don't know why you keep claiming they do and then claim you didn't say that. I haven't conflated anything that is solely on you conflated 51 unique and separate elections for electors into one national popular vote.l You can go on about metrics all you want what you are doing is not a metric of the what a national popular vote would produce. Until you understand that this can't go any further And no a popular vote is not like a radar gun stop with the inane analogies.

 

Note that in all of these definitions, not a one says that the popular vote is used to determine the president or vice president, yet it still exists. It is a COUNT OF THOSE WHO VOTED FOR WHICH CANDIDATE, not the method by which a candidate is declared the winner.

I have presented linked, objective evidence. I have a $100 bet that you cannot, or at least will not, produce any such linked objective evidence to counter the above.

 

In their state for their state's electoral votes and nothing further.

In their state for their state's electoral votes and nothing further.

Because there is no THE popular vote to win or lose, we don't vote in one big popular vote there are 51 unique and separate popular votes.

Within the state, there is no national popular vote for the US President and Vice President there is only national vote of the Electoral College. Tallying all those 51 separate and unique popular votes is meaningless trivia and nothing more it is not the result if there had been a national popular election, it is not a reflection of the "will of the people" on a national level.

 

You ignoring part of the quoted material, especially that highlighted to grab your attention, indicates that you have to manipulate quotes in order to adjust to your argument.

Once more:

You now have the definitions before you. Your strawmen have failed. Your attempts to reword what I am saying has failed. You have failed. We are now in the realm of my signature, unless you can provided linked evidence to your argument.