Amazon.com Widgets

Is the electoral college fair (yes) or unfair (no)?

  • If this is a true democracy, then presidents should be elected by the popular vote only.



    It is a shame that we live in a company that claims to be a
    democracy, yet our votes don’t necessarily count. A president can lose or tie with the popular
    vote, but win the presidency if they have more votes according to the electoral
    college. This doesn’t make sense to
    me. I think that they should just count
    every vote, and whichever candidate has the most votes should be the president.


  • Direct Democracies Historically Fail

    A system subject to the last fad in popular will has historically been unstable, and unsustainable, not to mention the nursery of some of the worst atrocities commited by man. There's a reason that no democracies have lasted more than 500 years. (we're already half-way there). Tools such as the US Constitution, electoral collage, etc. are unique in the history of democracy, and serve to limit the instability of a government run the popular mob of the citizenry. The EC ensures that a temporary, inflammatory issue to New Yorkers or Californians doesn't subject the rest of our diverse nation to their whims. If you think under the EC candidiates only care about Ohio and Florida, how is forcing them to only care about California and New York any better>

  • Direct Democracies Historically Fail

    A system subject to the last fad in popular will has historically been unstable, and unsustainable, not to mention the nursery of some of the worst atrocities commited by man. There's a reason that no democracies have lasted more than 500 years. (we're already half-way there). Tools such as the US Constitution, electoral collage, etc. are unique in the history of democracy, and serve to limit the instability of a government run the popular mob of the citizenry. The EC ensures that a temporary, inflammatory issue to New Yorkers or Californians doesn't subject the rest of our diverse nation to their whims. If you think under the EC candidiates only care about Ohio and Florida, how is forcing them to only care about California and New York any better>

  • Representative Democracy in the US

    The representative democracy helps keep the balance of the states together. States with heavy populations would dominate, but ultimately, they shouldn't have that level of power.
    All states deserve equal representation, and the electoral college does just that by putting big states like Cali and NY on the same playing field as Wyoming and Idaho.

  • The electoral college is undemocratic

    The electoral college was originally established as a way to prevent organized crime and labor unions from controlling major elections by lessening the impact of the actual vote tally and emphasizing widespread support over popular support. With the advent of the FBI and RICO laws the need for the electoral college has passed and the model is obsolete. The only function achieved by the electoral college in modern America is that it serves as yet one more separation between the direct will of the people and the results achieved in government and political representation.

  • Not even close

    Most believe the US to be one person one vote. The electoral college kills this idea by giving some slightly more that one vote and others slightly less. Even the idea that it is a 'failsafe' is naive with party loyalists appointed electors. It's extremely rare to have a faithless elector, even when it's obviously in the county's benefit.

  • Blue vote in red state

    If you live in a state that is not in line with how you vote, then your vote is meaningless. It is not fair and it is very well likely a reason why so few vote because their vote does not count. It is outdated and undemocratic in this day and age

  • Not a fair system

    Electoral College is an archaic system that may have worked over a hundred years ago when it was harder to count votes in time. Today it is unfair, ineffective, and unnecessary. People's votes count more or less depending on what state he or she lives in because of the electoral college valuing the smaller states over the larger states. Twice in modern history two presidents have been elected because of the electoral college but they did not win the popular vote. If those popular votes happen to be in the 'swing' states where the the electoral college depends on most to elect president then the candidate who won by the nation vote would have been elected. So it is unfair that people's votes count more or less just because of what states they happen to live in.

  • Imbalanced voting power

    Simply put: it is not fair because some states get more weight on their votes than others. For example, a person voting in Idaho has more weight than a person voting in California. A democracy means that EVERY vote counts, and each vote should have equal influence on an election.

  • Stupid and unnecessary. Should be done away with!

    Every vote should count! I live in a state that has traditionally voted Republican since forever. I happen to support the Republican candidate this year BUT, in years past I supported Democratic candidates. But there was no hope of my vote counting in that scenario. This is absolutely unfair and just a stupid process.

  • Of course it's not fair

    Wyoming residents get 4 times as many votes as California residents. What's fair about that? The electoral college ensures that politicians only pay attention to swing states and ignore "sure thing" states. Even if a third party received 40% of the vote in dozens of states, they could still get zero electoral votes because of the winner-takes-all rules of the electoral college. That's not fair at all.


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