The first article's main point is that the United States of America should not get rid of the electoral college, but do away with the popular vote instead. The popular vote does not pick the president, it merely choosing which party of electors will be able to cast their votes towards their candidate. The article also said that instead of the electors for each state be the state's senators and representatives, they should be people of that state, decided by a lottery held before the election day. The second article said that if the country gets rid of the electoral college, then it would be as though the country is handing the election to the states that have the highest populations (i.e. California and Texas). The smaller and less populated …show more content…
The candidate would only have to convince the fifty biggest cities in order to win the election. I agree with the first article in the sense that we should keep the electoral college, but get rid of the popular vote. The popular vote does very little when it comes to the presidential election, though the electors chosen by the popular vote are supposed to vote for their party's candidates, they do not always do so. I also agree that the electors should be those who reside in each state and chosen at random. That way, the president is more so chosen by the people instead of those who "represent the people". The electoral college also helps the small states have an opinion that actually is heard in the presidential election. In class, it was discussed that Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota together, though their combined population is less than that of Oklahoma, each of those states has three electoral votes, whereas Oklahoma just has seven votes. Going by electoral votes, a candidate would have a better chance at winning the election if they won over Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota versus Oklahoma. With the electoral college, a candidate could win over all thirty-nine small states and win the entire election. Though the candidate could be supported by less than a quarter of the population,
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
If the people were to elect the president directly, certain situations/problems wouldn’t be as analyzed like the Electoral College analyzes it. (McGraw Hill pg.385) If we were to get rid of the electoral college the states with a higher population would dominate the elections, therefore, leaving the small rural states unnoticed or with no voice. That would be very unfair towards rural areas, the present system gives the state’s power more strength and secures our federal system’s strength. (McGraw Hill pg.385)
Several years after the United States came to be, the Constitutional Convention met to determine how the new nation should govern itself. The delegates saw that it was crucial to have a president and vice president, but the delegates did not want these offices to reflect how the colonies were treated under the British rule. The delegates believed that the president’s power should be limited, and that he should be chosen through the system known as the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a body of people who represent the states of the US, who formally cast votes for the electing of the president and vice president. Many citizens feel that the Electoral College goes against our nation’s principle of representative democracy, while others
Also I think that if the candidates are looking for the electotal votes; then the states with the most electoral votes gets the most attention. They need to concentrate on the states with the most electoral votes. The smaller states or states with lesser electoral votes gets little to no attention. One good aspect of the Electoral College is that it makes more sense to the smaller states to ensure they still have a voice in the elections. If the President were to be elected by popular demand; they would be from a highly populated state leaving less room for the smaller states to cast their votes.
The decision to abolish the electoral college is not a new one. Ever since the introduction of the Constitution, with the electoral college being introduced in the second article and reaffirmed in the Twelfth Amendment, over seven hundred propositions have been made to modify or abolish the electoral college. Even though these attempts have all failed, it is important to note that there are major flaws in this system, and the decision to abolish, or discontinue, this way of life should be reevaluated. The first and largest flaw of this presidential college is its potential for corruption and misrepresentation.
Another pro to the electoral college system is it helps keep a two party system in this country. If it were an election based on popular vote some say it would be chaos because of how many people would be running for president. The electoral college lets the winning candidate get the majority of the vote In the 1992 polls, Bill Clinton only got 42 percent of the vote, but with Ross Perot’s influence, he won the majority of the electoral college. Ross perot was famous for splitting the republican vote in this election he was a billionaire that ran as a independent. This is one of the reasons George Bush sir didn't have a chance in this election.
Based on the pie charts, the reader is shown that presidents that did win the popular vote, did not win by that large of a margin the Independent candidate and other major-party candidate split the votes. The Electoral College only shows a larger win ratio. Abolishing the electoral college would “...encourage single-issue ideologues and eccentric millionaires to just into presidential contests” (Document E). Although these people tend to run anyways, the electoral college is a way to ensure that the people with no political background or people that do not qualify as president will not win. The Electoral College was originally built for a world that did not have mass media and a way for people among the U.S. to communicate, but presently, the Electoral College serves as a way to ensure
In Document C, Samples provides a federalist argument for supporting the electoral college by stating that it gives states an important role in choosing the president and thus supporting a fundamental principle of our democracy. The problem with Sample’s argument is that the electoral college is in essence undemocratic. We know that the electoral college is undemocratic because not only are small states over represented but a citizens vote can be weighted more or less depending on the state in which they reside in. In Document F, we are told what happens in case of a tie or no one winning the electoral vote. In case of this situation occurring then the House of Representatives will decide on who becomes president where state representatives will all get an equal vote.
The United States is a government republic, with chose authorities at the elected (national), state and neighborhood levels. On a national level, the head of express, the President, is chosen in a roundabout way by the general population of each state, through an Electoral College. Today, the balloters essentially dependably vote with the well-known vote of their state. All individuals from the government council, the Congress, are straightforwardly chosen by the general population of each state. There are many chosen workplaces at the state level, each state having no less than an elective Governor and council.
The electoral college keeps the federal system of government. Our founding fathers spent hours debating and creating our current system of government and election systems. The federal system has lasted america hundreds of years without fail. Many say current government officials should not mess with a seemingly flawless system. The current election systems ensures the people have a say in who is elected president but do not hold all of the power.
I think we should keep the Electoral College. Electoral College is defined in our textbook as; “An unofficial term that refers to the electors who cast the states’ electoral votes” (Patterson, T.E., 2013). Electoral voting is tied in with the states popular voting. Choosing electoral college adds to the cohesiveness of the nation by obliging an appropriation of popular support to be elected President, improves the status of minority interests, contributes to the political dependability of the country by promising a two-party system, and keeps up an elected arrangement of government and representation (Kimberling, W.C., 2008). I think that the Electoral College system is a big part of the cohesiveness of our country and it requires the distribution
The electoral college insures that this won't happen, distributing electoral votes out fairly. Just because the electoral college does have many flaws, does not mean there are no upsides that resolve problems from having a popular
The Electoral College is the process to which the United States elects the President, and the Vice President. The founders of the Constitution came up with this process. This was done to give additional power to the small states, and it was done to satisfy them. It works by the citizens of the United States electing representatives called electors. Each state is given the same amount of electors, as they are members of congress.
All through the history of the United States of America, many people have discussed the abolishment of the Electoral College. For many reasons, some believe it is what makes our country have the type of government we have, some believe that it's what limits the power of the government, and many people such as Mitch McConnell believes it is what gives us our freedom and prosperity. While these are valid arguments there is a multitude of reasons to why the electoral college should be abolished. Such as there is only a need for twelve states in order to become the president, popular vote of the people for president can still lose, and the Swing states are given too much power and attention compared to that of the other states. This is why I believe in the abolishment of the Electoral College.
For many years, America’s voting system has been criticized, with the main point of interest being the Electoral College. Some say that the Electoral College is necessary to streamline and simplify the voting process, while others say that it is outdated and takes away power from American citizens. After investigating the subject, it is clear that the Electoral College should be abolished due to the three major defects its critics find in the system; its undemocratic nature, its tendency to give small states’ votes too much power, and its disastrous effects on third-party candidates. The first, and possibly largest, defect in the Electoral College is its undemocratic nature. A professor of political science once said that “the Electoral College violates political equality” (Edwards 453).
The Electoral College system the founding fathers devised helps to balance out the power of the large, populous states. This system forces candidates to campaign in all states since they all carry some sway in the elections (“Understanding the Presidential Election”). However, other issues present themselves as well, like states with large independent voters that can be swayed and the issue that a candidate can lose the popular vote and win the election. The first issue is that states that are equally divided between democrats and republicans and hold a large number of electoral votes like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania are considered swing states. (“Understanding the Presidential Election”)