Trump seems like a preferable candidate than Hilary to me. You know what you're getting with strong and opinionated over shady and secretive. Does the final vote come down to amount of actual supporters in the polling station, or is it state by state like the primaries?

It bothers me, that in the UK Number of actual supporters is dismissed and is rather represented by counties/states won.

Speaking hypothetically, if you had 3 counties/states.

County 1
20 people vote for the Labour
55 For conservatives
25 for Green

County 2
75 for Labour
25 Conservative
0 Green

County 3
45 conservative
20 Labour
35 Green

In this system Conservatives win 2 counties and Labour 1. But overall votes would be 125 Conservative and 180 Green party.

17% of the UK population lives below the poverty line with most of the countries wealth within the cities.

Wealth distribution Bottom 5th represent 8% of countries wealth
Second 5th represent 13% of countries wealth
Third 5th represent 17% of countries wealth
Fourth 5th represent 23% of countries wealth
Top 5th represent 40% of countries wealth

People in the top fourth or fith might have disagreements between 2 parties, but the bottom 3 are more likely to be in favor of voting for a third party who takes income inequality more seriously.

Overall they could be a majority but since they know their votes will be lost they vote for the person least likely to make their lives harder than they already are. Losing confidence in their candidate.

I just can't fathom how that is considered democracy, and more to the point the power is then handed to the representative of that party for the next 4 years with nothing you can do.

In Switzerland important decisions go to public referendum meaning decisions in the country aren't just the will of one man and his political agenda.