The Instigator
nkrim
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
wolfman4711
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The electoral college should not decide the outcome of the presidential electoin

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 1 vote the winner is...
nkrim
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/17/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 655 times Debate No: 29296
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

nkrim

Pro

I believe that the electoral college system which assigns delegates to represent different areas of different states in the election of the President is not beneficial to democracy but rather detrimental to it and should be destroyed.

1st round acceptance
2nd round opening statements
3rd round rebuttals
4th round closing statements
wolfman4711

Con

I believe the electoral college is a good asset to this country.

I accept your challenge and look forward to debating with you. Thank you for making this debate and good luck to you
Debate Round No. 1
nkrim

Pro

The electoral college was set up back on the early days of our history when there were two classes, the intellectuals and the peasants. The men setting up our government did not think that the average farmer could make the absolute decision on something as important as the president, and so they set up the electoral college.

Today; however, this is no longer relevant. With television broadcastings of elections and the entirety of the internet almost all of those who will vote are well informed on the issues. However, if the majority of the people vote for their candidate of choice, that candidate might not be the president. This is not right, if the voters of America only have an indirect say on the president than this can't really be called a true democracy. Any delegate can just go and vote against the popular decision in their area, and even though it may ruin their career it wouldn't be the first example of political corruption. These days, if you live in an area where you are a political outcast your vote practically doesn't count and that is not right. Every person's vote should be equal, and every person should be able to effect the outcome of the election, not just those in swing states. This can be evident just merely in the touring patterns of presidential candidates on their campaign route, none of them every really visit new york or texas because they feel like the state itself is already decided because even if there were a few people who could vote republican in california they don't matter to the candidates.

Also, corrupt actions can be used to take advantage of the electoral college system, such as gerrymandering, a way for delegates to vote for the candidate they want rather than what the people may want by reorganizing their district to make it lean towards a certain political persuasion. This destroys the whole idea of democracy, when those in a position of power can make the decision of who becomes president despite popular decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Here is a wikipedia page containing certain information on all presidential elections. It's sorted by the margin in popular vote by percent, and the top 4 are the elections where the "elected" president did not win the popular vote. If this were a true democracy, as it should be, none of those men should've been president, but they were and that's not right. When one of the mottos of a country is "by the people, for the people," it shouldn't disregard "the people" when electing it's executive officer. The electoral college isn't always a problem, but it's never been any more useful, and the presidential election SHOULD never have problems, but the electoral college caused problems and a policy that goes against democracy shouldn't be part of a country who praises itself as the leader of democracy.
wolfman4711

Con

wolfman4711 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
nkrim

Pro

nkrim forfeited this round.
wolfman4711

Con

wolfman4711 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
nkrim

Pro

nkrim forfeited this round.
wolfman4711

Con

wolfman4711 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by KroneckerDelta 4 years ago
KroneckerDelta
nkrimwolfman4711Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con never made any arguments so clearly arguments go to Pro. I hesitate to say Pro had better conduct because they also forfeited the later rounds, but since they made one more round than Con, I'm giving them conduct points.