I truly dislike how more people can vote for one person than the other, yet the other can still win. It only seems logical that the person with the popular vote should win. The only states that I don't mind the electoral college in are states like Maine and Nebraska who have proportional (or portional, I'm not quite sure exactly what it's called) representation because it basically is popular vote.
The Electoral college seems to be an unfair way to elect the president of the United States. The Electoral college seems to be some kind of way to cheat an election. The President should be decided by the people, because the victor will affect the majority of the population. The people incorporated in the electoral college are most likely upper class citizens who will do fine no matter who is president. If anything the Electoral College should consist of random votes of citizens. It should not be designated people. With it random then we can ensure that it is what the general population would like.
The founders compromised two difficult positions with the electoral college. Many in the Continental Congress thought that allowing a straight popular vote was reckless, as most of the nation was still pretty much ignorant and illiterate. Yet the idea of Congress selecting a President didn't sit well either. The Electoral College was the compromise- it basically ensured that the representatives speaking for their districts could, you know, READ and understand what was going on.
The problem comes in today because we have a mostly literate society whose population has a decent base education level. And the Electors in the Electoral College are only bound in SOME states by law to cast their votes for the candidate that won their state. There is no specific Constitutional provision that says that they have to or that anything happens to them if they don't- there have been times in history that one candidate won a state but their electors cast their votes differently. That doesn't happen today due to our immediate media reporting (since the entire population can find out easily what the poll numbers are, they'd know if their electors didn't vote accordingly)- but there's nothing PREVENTING it either.
That said, there have been only FOUR times in US history that a President was elected without winning the popular vote (1824, 1876, 1888, 2000), so it is largely irrelevant if the electoral college changes or not, since only 7% of Presidential elections would have had different outcomes if there was no electoral college (the 1824 election doesn't count, as neither candidate won the required number of electoral college votes for a majority and the matter went to the House).
I understand that back in the early days of our nation the Electoral College was a good solution. But now it seems very outdated. Today we have the opportunity count all the votes on Election Day. Millions of people watch the coverage live and I feel that because these results are tracked by so many people at the same time, the popular vote should decide the winner. No vote will go to waste if the popular vote were to decide the winner. Turnout in states that lean strongly to the right or left would increase because even (for example) even the votes of Democrats in Alabama will count.
It's not an issue about powerful states to me. It's an issue about power to all Americans.
It allows for minority rule and cares more about the states rather than the actual citizens through winning states. It is outdated and never really worked in the first place. It would force politicians to make visits to states that don't swing the election to ultimately win, allowing for a more active campaign.
The electoral college made sense at a time when It was difficult to accurately count votes from different regions, and simplified things. It also was created in part because it was believed the people could not make such important decisions, so they choose others to do it for them. This goes against the core principles of democracy. People's votes currently only really matter if they live in a swing state that can go whichever way in an election. If popular vote was used, everyone would have equal weight.
For starters, it gives rural states more power. It is done by state, and within the state it is done by county and each county is worth the same. So, it gives the rural states more power. The reasons the founding fathers chose it are no longer relivent. So ya
The electoral college was set up to give smaller states a voice. However, its cost is people who live in non-swing states' votes do not matter. I have lived in a deep blue state, a deep red state, and now one of the biggest swing states in the country - and the electoral college just does not make any sense. The popular vote should be the only one that counts...And if they MUST keep the electoral college, at least make it so that not all votes would go to one candidate ... Ie, if a state had 3 electoral votes and 66% of the population voted Republican, 2 votes would go to the Republican candidate and one to the democrat
One word comes to mind when I think of the Electoral College: dumb. Going by the majority, it is not accurate representation of the American people. To better illustrate, think of California. California is worth 55 votes. Usually, those 55 votes go to the Democrat. What about the Republicans? Shouldn't their vote count too? Shouldn't their candidate have a fighting chance? Think about Arizona. Arizona has 11 votes. Those votes tend to go to the Republican candidate. What about the Democrats who voted? Does their candidate not get them even though they're rightfully theirs? The Electoral College should be eliminated. Instead, elections should be determined by the number of individual votes each candidate receives. Think about Student Council. Isn't the president elected based on the number of students votes they received? Or is one classroom worth 10 while the other is worth 7 because there is a difference of 5 students? The Electoral College is ridiculous, and it only confuses Americans. Seriously, go out and ask the first person you see walking down the street and ask them about the Electoral College. What would they say?
Ok for starters i am a republican, but I believe the electoral Collage should be removed because a lot of the democrat states have insane votes like for starters California has 53 electoral votes and the democrats always in that state, so if its a really close games and then California comes....... Well you know how that ends. Also i believe the american people's vote count. It sort of counts but not really and i think it should all depend on popular vote because that tells you who we want.
Everyone knows the main reason that the founding fathers set the electoral college into existence, because they thought the population was to uneducated to make an informed decision. And that, in modern times, is almost completely void. But, there is another reason for which many people forget. It Protects smaller states rights, and gives them power. Larger states with massive populations (i.E. California, New York) overshadow smaller states like Alaska and Rhode Island with smaller populations. But with the "Each state has at least 3 Electoral Votes" rule, they can have a little more weight in presidential elections, all the while larger states still having the most power.
There are many reasons why the electoral college should stay but for space sake I will list only a few. The first reason why I think the electoral college should stay is because it allows there to be a check and balance in voting. What I mean by this is that when someone runs for presidency they have they actually have to focus on there ideas instead of there fame or popularity. This protects the U.S. From getting a bad leader that is really popular and famous. The second reason is because it gives a second chance to people to get into government and help run the country. I rest my case.
The electoral college system makes sure Presidents have build nation-wide support and demonstrate that they will be good representatives to a multitude of people in both large and small states. Without this system, elections would be determined by which candidate campaigned the hardest in just a handful population centers to win a majority vote. There is otherwise little incentive to appeal to the broad, diverse American population spread across America, especially in less populous regions.