Does one’s vote for U.S. President really count? In a U.S. Presidential Election, the American people vote for their preferred candidate; however, votes from a select group of people known as electors are the only ones that count in the election. George Orwell’s 1984 displays the dangers of giving a select group of people too much power, as it deprives the people of their voice in governmental matters. 1984 reflects how the people do not have an actual say in who becomes their leader. The Electoral College stands in the way of a true democracy in the United States; therefore, the United States needs to abolish it in order for the government to hear the voices of the American people.
Although, candidates focusing more on the competitive states leave much of the county barely aware that there is even a presidential election going on. Mostly because these states have higher electoral votes. This discourages voter turnout because the individual vote only matters to the context of the state (Constitution,
This rings true with the presidential election of the 1800’s between republican Thomas Jefferson and federalist John Adam’s. Each felt that if the other was elected that the America that they knew would erupt in a civil war. Although they were once allies and collaborated on the establishment of the Declaration of Independence for the new Americas, during this election they couldn’t see eye to eye due to each other’s political views. The federalist favored a centralized system and form of government with urban manufacturing while the democratic- republican wanted to reduce national power and empower the states while supporting an agrarian society. One of the unique things about the elections of that time was that there were no running mates, the man who came in second got to be vice president, which means your vice president was actually the same person who would be fighting against you in the election.
Washington would see that individual communities and movements have created change for themselves, while working against others. It’s amazing what could be done if we stopped working against each other. While political parties aren’t going away, which would be to Washington’s dismay, he would suggest that the next president figure out a way to stop the two main parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, from being convinced their beliefs are the “correct” beliefs. If we cannot get rid of political parties, the best we can do is unite them. The only way to change our country is by working with each other, not against each other.
“The Electoral College is a process, not a place (What is the).” The Electoral College has been around since the Constitution, but the reason for its existence is strange. When the Constitution was being created the Founding Fathers believed that the new found American citizens would be too stupid to govern themselves, and thus, The Electoral College was born. The Electoral College functions by giving each state a select number of votes based on population (What is the). Once each state gets their Electoral votes they must choose Electors; this is a two part process.
Dear, state senator I think we should change to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. I think this because the Electoral College does not seem fair, the president that usually wins in popular vote loses to the vote for presidency, it is considered a non-democratic method for selecting a president, and it is all up to the electors of a candidate. The Electoral College should also be changed to popular vote because it is not the people who are choosing the president, it is the three electors sent from each different state. The Electoral College should be changed to election by popular vote, because it is not fair to the candidates.
The presidential ballot is a vote for the electors of a candidate implying that the voter is not voting in favor of the hopeful, but rather supporting a slate of voters vowed to vote in favor of a particular Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate. (book) Electoral College Most state laws build up a winner takes all system, wherein the ticket that wins a majority of votes wins the greater part of that state's dispensed electoral votes, and in this way has their slate of electors decided to vote in the Electoral College. Maine and Nebraska don't utilize this strategy, selecting rather to give two constituent votes to the statewide champ and one electoral vote to the victor of each Congressional district. Every state's triumphant slate of voters then meets at their individual state's capital on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December to cast their electoral votes on partitioned ballots for President and Vice President.
Currently, the electoral voters are the only ones with a direct vote in the election. In order for the election to be more reflective of the citizens’ wishes, the popular vote should become more significantly tied to the election. The Electoral College should not be the most prominent voting process, when the popular vote should be more important. The risk of untrustworthy electors increases, which causes the voter to feel that they are being cheated out of their votes, which may discourage them from voting in the future. There is also the high possibility in which neither candidates receive the majority of electoral votes required to win election, such as what occurred in the 1824 election, meaning the House of Representatives would have to decide who becomes
For the establishment to actively contemplate and strategize an avenue to change convention rules, to take delegation votes away from Donald Trump is an egregious insult to the American public who voted in the primary. The actions of the party, to include those delegates who conspired to turn those votes over to a different candidate, who by the way did not exist, sadly make the Democratic Party appear to they be the party of the American public. Yes, a significant percentage of voters think the Democratic Party is corrupt, however, even contemplating a method to alter or reallocate those votes designated for Donald Trump screams of the parties contempt for the American
With statistics shown about how the number of electors each state gets isn 't even fair, and that smaller states really do get more of an advantage it leads me to really question why they even have this system. America is about freedom, the freedom to choose your leader, the freedom to vote for laws, and the freedom to vote for who is eligible to pass these laws. If we are promised all these freedoms why is it that there is a whole complicated system not everyone even knows about that actually proves the popular votes of the people do not decipher our president? I believe it should be banned from use due to the unfairness of the process as a
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)
As Michael Baye writes in the American Economic Review, "the justice system precludes politicians from explicitly selling the prize to the highest bidder. Thus, politicians cannot let it become public knowledge that they are in the business of selling political favors. So an interesting market has been created to overcome this constraint, lobbying" (Baye 1993). Seemingly harsh words by the author, a closer examination of the world lobbyist reside in shows it to in fact be a market to buy and sell political favors. Politicians will always try and mask that this is not the case by proclaiming every bill they support is for the betterment of the local voters.
It would be extremely difficult to add a constitutional amendment and remove the electoral college, and the current electoral college disproportionately represents some, thus some sort of reform is necessary to maintain the peace. According to the USA Today’s editorial board, “one idea worth considering is to shift away from winner-take-all in each state to a proportional allocation of electors based on statewide vote totals.” This election method would make all states like Nebraska and Maine, where electoral votes may be divided amongst parties. In using this system, the popular vote would be more important, but would not be the ultimate deciding factor of the election, essentially combining the arguments for the two opposing sides. The number of electoral votes for each state should not change, as that would mean the population of congress would have to change.
Overall, should the Electoral College stay in place or should it be replaced? The Electoral College has many cons that must be heard before a decision can be made. A huge downside to the Electoral College is that it misperceives the general population into thinking that they