Amazon.com Widgets

American Presidency: Should the U.S. President be awarded to the individual that receives the most popular votes?

  • Yes, that's how democracies work.

    The electoral college is ridiculous and anti-democratic. In the 21st Century, there is no need for such a convoluted system of electing a president. Until we get rid of the electoral college, we are not a democratic nation and should not pretend to be one. Each person should have a say in our electoral process.

  • If you live in a state where you hold the minority view, your vote is meaningless.

    Because of the way the electoral college functions, if you live in a state dominated by conservatives and you are liberal or vice versa and you vote for president, your vote means nothing; This is because electoral votes aren't awarded based on the proportion of people voting for them but whether or not the majority of people in that state vote democrat or republican, which sounds the same but is mathematically very different as I will demonstrate

    State X has 150 electoral votes and 100,000,000 people 48,000,000 of them vote republican 52,000,000 vote democrat under the American system 150 electoral votes go to democrat

    State Y has 75 electoral votes and 50,000,000 people all 50,000,000 of them vote republican

    This leaves the popular vote at 98,000,000 republican 52,000,000 democrat and yet democrats win the election with 150 electoral votes compared to 75 republican votes, that is the problem with the electoral college.

  • The electoral college system is archaic

    In most countries in the world with a presidential system, the popular vote is the deciding factor in choosing a candidate. The American system stems from the age of slavery and is an anachronism and an impediment to the democratic functioning of the country in the present day. Therefore, it would make sense to change the system.

  • The Presidency should be awarded to the individual who recieves the most popular votes.

    The Electoral College makes sense from a historical perspective; this system helped deal with an overwhelming situation. However, in this day and age with all of the technology at our disposal, I think the United States should consider simply awarding the presidency based on the popular vote. This also eliminates a level of complication and a topic of debate in the matter of electing the President.

  • Yes it should

    I have never understood the American election process. Of course i understand it, but I do not know why the do it that way. In England, the Prime Minister is elected by the amount of votes in total. This is much fairer than the way that the Americans vote. It should be changed.

  • The reason for the electoral college

    If we were to go based on popular vote there would be about 7 states that decide the election there would be entire sections of the country that aren't relevant in elections. Campaigns would spend all their time in these big states ignoring less populated areas. The electoral college protects the minority.

  • Simply because of a myth.

    People believe that in the popular vote rule, the largest states would determine the results of the election. That, ladies and gentlemen, is absolute b******t. People believe that in states such as New York, things are overwhelmingly blue, when it's actually a slightly blue-tilted purple. This is the same vice versa in states like Texas.

    "But that means the popular vote wouldn't work! Candidates would still lose votes because the states are still in favour of their opponent!"

    Yea... By less than 10 percent in EVERY case this myth applies. You can't blame the popular vote for that not getting tipped; if the candidate can't sway things their way, its their fault.

  • No it shouldn't

    If the election was based on the popular vote, the candidates would only have to focus on big states such as California, New York, and Texas that would completely control the election. Smaller states would never have a chance to affect the election results. The electoral college also requires the presidential candidate to have transregional appeal so that candidates are not elected by just one or two regions. There are not enough electoral votes in one region to elect a president, so this would force the candidates to focus on all regions of the United States.

  • The Electoral College is needed

    If you did your research on why we have the electoral college many of you would change your minds. The creation of the electoral vote was to prevent too much democracy in America. The federal government has given power to the people when electing state officials and to give all of the power to the people would surely lead to a democratic downfall. We are in fact a democracy. Our state elects, who has more power than the federal government legally, and township elects are 100% chosen by the people and are the people that would effect your everyday lives more.

  • Simply because of a myth

    . People believe that in the popular vote rule, the largest states would determine the results of the election. That, ladies and gentlemen, is absolute b******t. People believe that in states such as New York, things are overwhelmingly blue, when it's actually a slightly blue-tilted purple. This is the same vice versa in states like Texas.

    "But that means the popular vote wouldn't work! Candidates would still lose votes because the states are still in favour of their opponent!"

    Yea... By less than 10 percent in EVERY case this myth applies. You can't blame the popular vote for that not getting tipped; if the candidate can't sway things their way, its their fault.
    Same here and kid don't get to vote


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.