Because of the winner take all system candidates don 't spend time in states they don 't have a chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the “swing” states. Seventeen states did not see the candidates at all, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn 't get to see a single campaign ad. The electoral college is unfair,outdated, and irrational.
Did you know that on election day you do not vote directly for president. Many people don’t like that they don’t ultimintly decide for president. They however don’t understant that it is there for a quite a few reasons. The first is that the founding fathers created the electoral college, second that it ensures that every state gets a say in who the president is, and number three is that it makes sure that the president is chosen by a majority vote and not a popular vote. When the founding fathers built this country they made the electoral college so that the presadent could be picked by an educated population.
Contemporary barriers to voting vary among age, racial, social and economic groups. Younger people for instance have no time to vote particularly if there is a long line at the polling station. This barrier of inconvenience makes people lazy to a point they do not care enough to make an effort. Some feel they have little or no impact in the outcome of the election. Language is another contemporary barrier to voting.
Apart from this uneven distribution the system of “winner takes all” also discourages people from going out to vote. For example, some Republican lives in a Democratic state that always goes Democratic when it comes to elections, they tend to not go out and vote because they know their vote won’t make a difference because of this “winner takes all” system. In the past 4 elections there has been an average voter outcome which is all around the same, but there is still a chunk of people who don’t go out and vote. Another reason people may not go out to vote is the unfairness of elections. For example, in this past election the two candidates were Donald Trump (Republican) and Hillary
Politics and Debating There are 7,463,973,000 people,237 countries, and 237 national leaders in the world. Since not all countries elect their leaders in a democratic way, there are much fewer presidents in the world. These chosen, special leaders of the nations must have great abilities that can lead to the nation’s wealth and world peace, and presidential candidates often show these abilities to the voters through presidential debates. However, some people argue that having great debating ability doesn’t prove the person’s aptitude as a president. This is not true, and the ability to debate well is highly needed.
Today you can voice your opinion and write what you believe. However there once was a law in place that went against that freedom. It was called the Sedition Act, it went against the first amendment of the United States constitution, and it turned the political parties against each other. It caused many people to become angry because their freedom to talk and express their opinion had be taken away. The reason I request for its repel is because it was a violation of the first amendment, turned political parties against each other, and because the only reason the Sedition Act was made was because of the president’s wife.
The procedure is the same for the Vice Presidency, aside from that the U.S. Senate makes that choice. Neither the Constitution nor Federal decision laws force balloters to vote in favor of their gathering 's applicant. All things considered, twenty-seven states have laws on the books that oblige balloters to vote in favor of their gathering 's applicant if that hopeful gets a dominant part of the state 's prevalent vote. In 24 expresses, no such laws apply, however regular practice is for balloters to vote in favor of their gathering 's candidate. an applicant could lose the prominent vote and win the constituent school vote.
Due to the past election there has been several protests and opposing opinions thrown from both the Democratic and Republican parties. One particular article, “Why We Should Abolish the Electoral College”, suggests the idea that our society should abolish the electoral college, due to it’s “unequal distributed [voting power] across our nation”, and switch to the popular vote, when voting during a presidential election. At first this idea may seem sensible to those who do not understand how the electoral college works, the demand is in fact, senseless and will only lead to unproportioned voting amongst all states. However, it is easy to understand why this article is depicting that the electoral college needs adjustments, and to view the main
If we look at most of our opinion when it comes to voting comes from the band wagon affect these days. Media often sways people’s perception on the candidate. I believe that voting doesn’t do us any good when it comes to electing the President of the United States of America or anyone elected to State Represenitive, Governor, or state local official. No matter who get the most popular vote or majority of the votes, the Electoral College always wins. To me this makes voting it senseless to me since the candidate that the American people have voted for will not get elected because of the Electoral College.
It also consist of the number of members it has in the Senate, which is always two regardless of the State 's population. Being that states get a select number of electoral votes, in most cases, the Electoral College fails to accurately reflect the national popular vote. Electors have the power to vote for whomever they want even though ultimately they are supposed to represent the popular vote. Another problem with the Electoral College is it gives voters no incentive to vote. Being that the Electoral College votes elects the president, it discourages voters in states to not vote in
Although the popular votes do not determine the elector votes, it almost always happens where the electors vote for whom the popular votes resulted in. This is one of the many reasons why the Electoral College is unfair, past elections have shown that bigger populations have more electoral votes, concluding that smaller states’ votes become insignificant. This leaves people in question, is the Electoral College now based on where you live? Even though the purpose of the electoral college is to ultimately decide who will occupy the position of the president, there was an Electoral Commision of elite representatives, established to determine the 19th President, because of the situation the electoral college caused. The commission included five representatives from the House, another five associates from the Senate and five justices from the Supreme Court.
The Electoral College is a system that was put in place in 1787 when the founding fathers were determining how to fairly elect a president in a country that had different sized states that separated themselves from a centralized national government in a time when national votes being collected from all of the people, given the rural areas and lack of transportation or communication, was not feasible, thus eliminating the idea of a simple national popular vote. Other ideas suggested included having Congress or state legislatures elect the president, but these too were discarded due to the risks of upsetting balance of the power, either between the executive and legislative branch, or between state and federal governments. In the end, the concept of the Electoral College was passed. With the Electoral College, each state has a specified number of voting districts, these divided and based upon the population of that state. During an election, the people vote for the candidate they choose, and the candidate who wins the popular vote wins the election - for that state.
The people of each state vote for the electors who then cast their votes on the people’s behalf. “As the 2000 election reminded us, the Electoral College does make it possible for a candidate to win the popular vote and still not become president” (Miller, J., 2008, February 11), yet that is less a result of the Electoral College and more a result of the way states allocate balloters. In every state except Maine and Nebraska, voters are honored on a champ take-all premise. So if a competitor wins a state by even a restricted edge, he or she wins the majority of the state 's discretionary votes. The winner take-all framework is not governmentally commanded; states are allowed to dispense their constituent votes as they wish (Miller, J., 2008, February 11).
The Electoral College is a crucial component of how the President of The United States is elected. The votes cast by the Electoral College can outweigh the popular vote of the American public, so it would be consequential for the American public to be aware of the Electoral College and have at least a basic understanding of how it works. This, however, is sadly not the case. Even some of today’s elected officials are not up to date on how the government works. The Intercollegiate Studies Institute ran a poll of twenty-five hundred randomly selected Americans, out of the members of that poll that were elected officials only fifty-three percent of them answered correctly when asked if they knew what the Electoral College’s function was.