The Instigator
Yarely
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
anonynomous
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The Electoral College should be abolished

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/28/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,250 times Debate No: 28716
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

Yarely

Pro

I will be arguing that the Electoral College should be abolished

I believe that the Electoral College contradicts the idea of a "Democracy" and instead implies a "Republic" or a country run by the "Elite."

I believe that the Electoral College should be abolished for these reasons:

Theres always a possibility of electing a president who didn't get a majority vote

There's the risk of "faithless" Electors,

There's the possible role of the Electoral College in depressing voter turnout

There's a possibility of failure to accurately reflect the national popular will.
http://uselectionatlas.org......

The Electoral College also gives more weight to votes cast in small states etc.
http://www.scholastic.com......


Con will be arguing that the Electoral College should not be abolished for any reasons that Con provides
Debate Round No. 1
Yarely

Pro

I believe that the Electoral Collge should be replaced with the National Vote on theses grounds

Theres always a possibility of electing a president who didn't get a majority vote

There's the possible role of the Electoral College in depressing voter turnout

There's a possibility of failure to accurately reflect the national popular will.
http://uselectionatlas.org.........

The Electoral College also gives more weight to votes cast in small states etc.
http://www.scholastic.com......






1) Theres always a possibility of electing a president who didn't get a majority vote
The electoral college is responsible for deciding in the end, who wins the election based on their own judgement

So theres always a possibility that a candidate who got the minority votes, could win.
That's what happened to Al Gore. Al Gore got the majority vote but lost in the electoral college vote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com......

This is extremely significant as it shows that millions of candidates votes are wasted because the electoral college ultimately decides who becomes the president and vice-president.

Small states are also disproportionately held in too much importance under the electoral college system. Since there are less people in smaller states, if their vote drastically affects the vote in the way that the electoral college is run, than more people will be affected than if the larger states got their way.

2) There's the possible role of the Electoral College in depressing voter turnout
"Their argument is that, since each State is entitled to the same number of electoral votes regardless of its voter turnout, there is no incentive in the States to encourage voter participation."
http://uselectionatlas.org...

Also since there's also the possibility that a candidate with minority votes could win, there would be less of an incentive to vote since their votes cast aren't as important

3) There's a possibility of failure to accurately reflect the national popular will.

"First, the distribution of Electoral votes in the College tends to over-represent people in rural States. This is because the number of Electors for each State is determined by the number of members it has in the House (which more or less reflects the State's population size) plus the number of members it has in the Senate (which is always two regardless of the State's population). The result is that in 1988, for example, the combined voting age population (3,119,000) of the seven least populous jurisdiction of Alaska, Delaware, the District of Columbia, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming carried the same voting strength in the Electoral College (21 Electoral votes) as the 9,614,000 persons of voting age in the State of Florida. Each Floridian's potential vote, then, carried about one third the weight of a potential vote in the other States listed.

A second way in which the Electoral College fails to accurately reflect the national popular will stems primarily from the winner-take-all mechanism whereby the presidential candidate who wins the most popular votes in the State wins all the Electoral votes of that State. One effect of this mechanism is to make it extremely difficult for third party or independent candidates ever to make much of a showing in the Electoral College. If, for example, a third party or independent candidate were to win the support of even as many as 25% of the voters nationwide, he might still end up with no Electoral College votes at all unless he won a plurality of votes in at least one State. And even if he managed to win a few States, his support elsewhere would not be reflected. By thus failing to accurately reflect the national popular will, the argument goes, the Electoral College reinforces a two party system, discourages third party or independent candidates, and thereby tends to restrict choices available to the electorate." http://uselectionatlas.org...

The electoral college was created in order to protect the country against "the bad votes because of the ignorance of the people."
The writers of the Constitution were elitists.
They didn't want the uneducated people deciding who would become president. it may have been for the best at the time but now people are more educated than back then. If the electoral college is abolished, than people will become more encouraged to become educated about politics since they feel that their vote will make more of a difference.

Abolishing the electoral college would also bring in more room for third party candidates and such

The fact that there is still an electoral college implies that the Government does not trust the people enough to make a wise decision in their vote.
It still implies the elitist doctrine that was held in the sentiment of the writers of the Constitution.

This is not a true democracy!

If the Government continues making decisions for the people instead of the people making decisions for themselves, than the Government will always have immense power over us.

The people deserve the take back their country and ultimately decide for themselves who will run the country and no electoral college is going to make that decision for them!
anonynomous

Con

please don't vote on this we have decided to redo this debate with a slightly different Resolution
Debate Round No. 2
Yarely

Pro

This debate is cancelled
anonynomous

Con

give a man a fish and he will eat for a day but teach a man to fish and you give up your monopoly on fisheries- Im going to assume john D. rockefeller said this it seems to be somthing he would say.
Debate Round No. 3
Yarely

Pro

Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get
anonynomous

Con

Statistics are like miny skirts they reveal a lot but hide what's important
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by BennyW 3 years ago
BennyW
"I believe that the Electoral College contradicts the idea of a "Democracy" and instead implies a "Republic" or a country run by the "Elite."" The US is a Republic not a Democracy.
Posted by anonynomous 3 years ago
anonynomous
if your intersted in this debate search should the electoral college be abolished in favor of a national vote. We are currently in the last round and you should be able to vote on it within a day.
Posted by malcolmxy 3 years ago
malcolmxy
what happened?
Posted by morgan2252 3 years ago
morgan2252
I love the use of cliches at the end.
Posted by anonynomous 3 years ago
anonynomous
Alright but I'm not asking you to run a defensive case all you have to do is show how a national vote is better than the electoral college
Posted by Yarely 3 years ago
Yarely
I'm not talking about a complete Direct Democracy. I'm just saying that if the Electoral College is abolished, it would create a more "Direct" Representative Democracy which would be inherently beneficial.
And I am arguing for a national vote as opposed to the Electoral College deciding who becomes president.

Do you just want to forfeit and start a new debate?
You can initiate it, which would make me argue the defensive
Posted by anonynomous 3 years ago
anonynomous
im not sure if your implying a national vote or just we vote on everthing in the athenian sense but im assuming your implying the second so ill address that. Direct democracy is great in a hypothetical sensne but in practice it can't work on any large scale espically one involving 300 million people such as america it's just totaly ineffecient and even less would get done. Also it would require every voter to be informed on every issue and i don't see that happening very soon. now that im done ranting about direct democracy i just want the resolution to be changed because otherwise i have to run a completly defensive arguement and thats no fun:(
Posted by Yarely 3 years ago
Yarely
What makes you think a more direct Democracy isn't inherently beneficial?
Posted by Oxymoron 3 years ago
Oxymoron
I love how the opponents of the Electoral Vote always assume Democracy is inherently beneficial.
Posted by anonynomous 3 years ago
anonynomous
i want the resolution to be rephrased as should the electoral college be abolished in favor of a national vote
No votes have been placed for this debate.