Is it reasonable to expect people not to make partisan comments?

I guess that depends on how you define "majority." His supporters do not comprise the majority of the population, though were well-distributed enough that he had the majority of electoral college votes. 

But, I'm not sure what your answer had to do with the question, except maybe to highlight the point it made. 

I believe the market research and census data says that 40% of Americans identify as Republicans.

Academic analysts of how Trump won say that the whole country underestimated the disillusionment of a large body of under-educated and un- or under-employed whites who rose up to protest at their lot because they found Trump's message answered their need.
At the same time, many Democrats didn't bother to vote, especially the young, because they thought it was impossible for Trump to win, because they saw him as an unqualified buffoon.
The national vote was a narrow majority for the Dems, but the electoral college gave the vote to Trump.

The rest of the world looked on in absolute shock. They've got used to him now, and each country and each international body has worked out its own way to cope with him. This post was edited by inky at October 10, 2018 4:18 PM MDT

Actually many people who self identify as Dem voted for President Trump. Every Obama voter I know was a Trump voter this time. (I am originally from IL so I know a lot of Obama voters) 
All of Hillary's popular vote victory came from one state California. Trump won the popular vote in the other 49 states. 

Some of us who identified for years as Democratic voters could no longer do so when the party ideals and platforms became so far out and extreme and outrageous after 2000.  No borders?   Demonizing hard work, success, and religion?  "Reparations"?  Redistribution of wealth?  Creation of artificial "classes" by government mandating that some of us must pay more for the same goods and services?  (This on top of an already graduated income tax) Government take-over of law enforcement?  And the list goes on.  

"Every Obama voter I know was a Trump voter this time." Myth debunked. I voted for Obama and Clinton. 

Also, Clinton had 2.8 million more votes than Trump did nation-wide. Clinton was more popular by a landslide. More people voted for Clinton.

It took me a while to figure out why you thought Clinton's votes came from California. She won 20 states, so that doesn't make sense. Then, I found a reference saying a news outlet looked at how California voted and concluded that, if the Cali votes were removed from the equation, she wouldn't have won the popular vote overall. Fair enough, but the popular vote didn't come from Cali alone. It may have pushed her over the edge, but she wouldn't have been in a position to take the popular vote if other parts of the country didn't vote for her as well. You can read more about that here: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hillary-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/ 

Fair enough.  You are the exception that proves the rule...lol. 

True the popular vote comes from all the states. But as your snopes links states. We have the electoral college for a reason. So that more populous states do not rule over less populous states. A candidate must appeal to the entire nation. If we only went by popular vote....the campaigns would be completely different concentrating on basically CA, NY and TX. 

If we actually did popular vote....there would have been a run off because no candidate reached 50% or at least that is how it normally works. Personally I do not consider 2% a landslide. And with nearly 8Mil other voters it would be anyone's election. 

 Clinton (48%)   65,844,640        Trump (46%)  62,979,636     Other (6%)  7,804,213    Total  136,628,489.00

Wrong, m2c. FWIW, she also carried the popular vote by overwhelming margins in large northeastern states such as Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York. And I also voted for Obama and Clinton, as did many people I know. The last and only time I voted Republican for president was for Reagan in 1984. This post was edited by Stu Spelling Bee at October 12, 2018 11:06 PM MDT

She did win those states. I did not say she did not. What I said was the difference in popular vote in CA is what gave her the pop vote victory. She won the popular vote by 2.8 mil. She won CA by 4.3Mil  8,753,788 4,483,810.  More than surpassing the popular vote difference.
NY Hillary won but only by  1.7Mil.  4,556,124 2,819,534 
So as I said if you take the popular vote of all 49 states, excluding CA....Trump wins the popular vote. 

Are we all so isolated that we must turn to "market research". "census data", and "academic analysts"  for our answers?  Why not ask people who voted for Pres. Trump why we did so?  While I might be considered "under-educated" from a formal point of view certainly my husband is not and neither of us could in any way be considered "un- or "under-employed"! I agree that many did not bother to vote because they saw no way he could win. But many of us, though we had no personal love for him, voted for him because he was willing to support  traditional values   which we grew up with and accepted and saw as essential to our freedoms and to the greatness of our country.  Which Democrats had attacked as out-dated, wrong, and  in efficient. Nor I am talking about our belief in individual determination, individual effort, individual responsibility.  In the essential equality of people, in God and our responsibility to each other.  We voted not to "protest" but to preserve the way of life we have always known and enjoyed and assumed and now see as being threatened by those who would take it away from us in the name of  "compassion" and social experimentation having no practical basis in the realities of life.  Certainly just the notions of being "under-educated" or "under-employed"  says so much about the assumptions which underlie them-  the idea that if we are educated we will all believe the same thing and otherwise we must be considered ignorant. and the idea that  employment is somehow a right and not a privilege.  Which fly directly in the face on what those of us who are older were taught believe  and who grew up loving our country and its greatest institutions.

I would be more interested in your answer if you did not lend so much weight to the contrapositive of your position.

What I think you are referring to was not an answer but a comment.  "Contrapositive"? Never heard of that -should look it up I suppose but don't have time right now.

If you re-read carefully where I wrote "un- or under-educated", you will see that I was not referring to all those who voted for Trump, nor was I referring to or implying voters who swing. I was talking about a specific and very large sub-group who usually don't vote at all. The American academics who did the research were careful in analyzing their demographics, otherwise, the research would have had no validity, would never have been published and then internationally discussed in the media.
I don't doubt that the reasons you give are true, nor that you may know many others in your circle of acquaintances who thought and felt the same.
The trouble with any level of isolation - and we are all relatively isolated within our own social milieux - is that it is incapable of seeing the larger picture.
That is why governments, parties, market researchers and academics conduct broadscale surveys with specific demographics to match the proportions of the population as a whole. The larger the number of people who answered the surveys, the more valid the analysis.

In my opinion and understanding that more than people thinking that Trump couldn't win,  many Democrats, especially younger people, refused to vote for Hillary Clinton. They were so angry and outraged that Bernie Sanders didn't win the party nomination that they either voted for the libertarian or green party or wrote in Bernie Sanders. I understand their anger and outrage, but every vote not cast for Clinton was a vote for Trump, and here we are. 

There are a few Bernie supporters on AM who said they voted for Trump directly as well. 

They sure showed Hillary and the DNC, didn't they? 

 SMH! 

Indeed....and thank God they did.

Yep, Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler... God's most favorite politicians ever. 

"We are determined, as leaders of the nation, to fulfill as a national government the task which has been given to us, swearing fidelity only to God, our conscience, and our Volk... This the national government will regard its first and foremost duty to restore the unity of spirit and purpose of our Volk. It will preserve and defend the foundations upon which the power of our nation rests. It will take Christianity, as the basis of our collective morality, and the family as the nucleus of our Volk and state, under its firm protection.... May God Almighty take our work into his grace, give true form to our will, bless our insight, and endow us with the trust of our Volk." - Adolf Hitler, February 1, 1933

And here's one of Trump's best moments on his Christian faith. Enjoy! :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=336lpsPLpwo

That is between Trump and God. 

I am happy with policy. 

An apt point.
There is always the real risk that faith or the claims of faith can be abused to achieve things that go against the tenets of the faith itself.
In history around the globe, we have seen this happen almost everytime religion is used as the justification to go to war, or to torture, enslave or kill dissidents. This post was edited by inky at October 18, 2018 7:50 PM MDT

Yep.
With many different surveys, all the professional analysts came to that same conclusion.

It seems we're on the same page.
I enjoy listening to the information and analysis provided by experts on their topics, and I enjoy listening to well-informed debate.
If I haven't got it from watching the most recent current affairs, I go online to find it from govt databases or the top universities and research institutes.