Amazon.com Widgets
  • Is the electoral college undemocratic?

    Absolutely the electoral college is undemocratic as it has the potential to eliminate the votes of millions of people as it did in 2016. It is archaic and does not really "protect" smaller rural states from the "unruly masses" found in large cities. Every other electoral office from dogcatcher to governor to senator is by popular vote and so it should be for the most important electoral office in our country.

  • Yes, But that doesn't mean we should abolish it

    Of course the electoral college is undemocratic. America is not a democracy! The United States is a constitutional representative republic, And it will always stay that way. So, Yes the electoral college is undemocratic; but so is the foundation of the United States Of America. Do not abolish the electoral college.

  • Should vote for the candidate- not the Elector.

    Our votes don't really go to a candidate. Rather we vote for the state's Electors that are supposed to vote for their party. While they are supposed to vote in that manner, It is not required, Meaning a state could have 13 Electoral votes and vote 80% Republican, But the Electors could decide to vote for the Democratic candidate. This is indirect and should be replaced with the style adopted by Nebraska and Maine, Which divides up the votes by district. This would ensure that every vote counts, Much more directly.

  • It makes the country in the tyranny of the minority.

    In the 57 elections we have had, it has failed 5 times. That's about 9% of the time. It has failed 2 of the last 5 elections too. Well I do understand it trying to stop the tyranny of the majority. Thanks to the current system, it allows the tyranny of the minority.

    What if the winner of the election wins by 10 million votes and loses the EC (Electoral College) goes to the other person. Is that fine? How about 20 million votes and still loses. Clinton had about 3 million more than Trump. So someone winning by 10 million is quiet possible.

    The problem with the EC, is it takes away the power of the larger populate areas and gives all the power to the smaller communities. Yes a NPV (National Popular Vote) would change that around and give a little more power to larger areas. I still think the power would be in the smaller population pockets though.

    One of the problems of the EC is the two-party system. If there were like 3 or 4 solid parties it would work fine. I think it would make the NPV too close to the point we would need a EC. Two parties pretty much makes EC, bow to the minority.

    Winner take all or proportional would also take power away from the larger city areas. It once again leaves us with the tyranny of the minority.

    Another issue it has is voter suppression. 40 states usually don't swing or aren't really that close in voting. In those 40 states, thanks to the two parties. If you live in Texas and vote Democratic, you are wasting your vote just as if you live in California and vote Republican. 40 states are like that. Also why should a Dem or Rep go to those states and listen to those people and there needs.

    Yes the EC comes down to 10 states, but really it's only 5. Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The other 5 swing states really don't matter. That's close to about 35% needed to win the EC. When the entire populations of those states is about 19% of the country.

    A NPV, I think would balance it out. Yes larger cities will generally lean one way. But I'd be willing to bet even large cities, 25% will vote the opposing way. It will also help get rid of the two party (really one party). That being said, I do think it should be down to the final 4. Than vote from that.

  • Democracy like pregnancy can't be partial.

    One person. One vote. Each important.
    A government of the people, by the people, for the people.
    To ignore the vote of the people is to ignore basic democracy.
    And anyone that says different has an agenda.
    Once every person's vote is taken for it's value, only then can you consider yourself a democracy.

  • It is undemocratic

    The electoral college is undemocratic. This is because it does not directly give power to a citizens votes, like democracy was intended. While others may say that America is a republic, the voting system is advertised as democratic, and therefore should be. Additionally, this allows for the popular vote to be disenfranchised as the winner is decided by power wielded by each state. Thank you.

  • Not what democracy is about

    The electoral college is bad for democracy because the person with the most votes does not always win, I believe the every election outcome should always represent what the majority of voters want. We should abolish the electoral college in favor of a direct national popular vote forceing them to listen whats on voters minds

  • E Electoral College is undemocratic.

    The fact that you can lose the popular vote but manage to win the election is stupid. It is pretty much not counting millions of people's votes for a couple of the electoral college's votes which is wrong and going against our natural born right, as US citizens, to vote for the president of our country.

  • It's not democratic if it tells a large group of people that their votes don't count

    The current US election system is a convoluted mess, it's also undemocratic. The most blatantly obvious factor in this is the way the candidate who got the most votes can still lose, basically telling over a million people that their votes don't matter due to how the electoral college system works. One also needs to consider how these elections are held. A lot of other countries hold their election on weekends, making it a holiday is also an option. This ensures that a lot of people can come out to vote without the poorest having to refrain from doing so because they can't afford to miss a day of work. The US doesn't do this, thereby excluding a lot of people, the poorest and most vulnerable ones. How is that democratic?

  • Flawed system in a number of areas

    The most pressing concerns for me:
    1. The lack of options. In practice, the US is a two-party system and a big big portion of the population lack an option that suits them. A vote for a third party is considered a "wasted" vote or even a "vote on the opposition", if you for example vote libertarian and not republican.
    2. The low voter turnout. Too few of the population vote because of point 1 and because it's too hard for people to vote, takes a lot of time and isnt possible for people that must work to survive that day, etc. The system is made so that many feel its much of hassle to go to vote, so many don't. A major democratic issue.
    3. Corrupt and/or biased conservative/liberal media. Fox, cnn, etc. For example, Bernie Sanders got shut out of media almost completely, and the rightwing turn to completely unreliable sources because they feel none of the mainstream media is unbiased. I feel bias is better than lies, but both are a big deal. If Trump creates a media organization, it will probably be even worse.
    4. The electorate system. The candidate with most voters do NOT win, its all about where the distribution is.
    The are certainly more reasons I cannot think of now!

  • True Democracy is where all Votes count. Our Country is not a True Democracy as we force people to not vote

    Some people don't vote, Because of the electoral vote invalidates their votes. So why vote? Most people argue this. So Are we a true Democracy or what are we? This is an old system that came by with the election of the Pope. It should no longer apply to USA

  • It is essential to prevent a majority

    People who oppose the Electoral College obviously, for the most part, have no understanding of it and why it exists. The majority of the population are in large urban cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, etc. and with a popular vote, not only would these cities or the states that these cities are in, be the primary voice in an election but they would also interfere with other states' votes as well and would therefore, take away the voting power of the smaller states. The Electoral College is based on the popular vote of each state because each state has their own preference as to who they want as President. It ensures that every person and every state has a voice and that nobody's vote can overpower another. It also encourages the candidates to have trans-regional appeal. If it were just up to the popular vote, they may only campaign in large cities and ignore smaller, more rural areas. The only downside to it is the fact that it's possible for the electors to vote for someone other than who their state voted for. This is extremely rare though.

  • Sometimes democracies go awry

    The Founding Fathers understood that direct election of the executive by the people could end badly - in mob rule or demagoguery. They gleaned this from Plutarch, Plato, and Thucydides. The electoral college is an unpopular but necessary check on democracy that we need. That said, the 'party pledge' system now undertaken is wrong.

  • It Is Democratic

    The electoral college is a function of democracy. It is a tool for how American democracy is carried out. True, it can be inefficient at times, but it still carries out its purpose in expressing the will of the American voting public. That said, it could be reformed to work better.


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

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.