Electoral College: President Of The United States

Most states are always republican or democratic in the way they vote. So the amount of votes is already in favor of one candidate or another before voting actually arrives.(Document 7). Since the candidates are always insured a certain number of votes, the candidates only have to worry about “swing states” or states that change their decisions every election. Since the non-swing states never decide in favor of one candidate or the other by themselves the power to elect a new president resides with whom the citizens of swing states vote for. Without an electoral college, each citizen's vote would be worth more and everyone could help determine a new president instead of the select few who are living in “swing states.” All of these reasons help to make it clear that the electoral college is a corrupt

When Americans vote for president, they are actually voting for presidential electors, who are known as a whole to be the electoral college. These electors, who are elected by citizens of the United States, are the ones that elect the chief executive. The electoral college has shaped the past, present,

First of all, the Electoral College ignores what most citizens want and undervalues their votes. Because people in each state are voting for electors that are assigned to each party rather than the actual candidates, the decision for president is really up to 538 electors instead of the population of more than 300 million Americans (The Electoral College: Top 3 Pros and Cons). 48 states use a winner-take-all system, where the dominant candidate in each state gains control of all the electors. The only states that don’t use this system are Maine and Nebraska ( ). This system the election about winning states in order to gain electors, and not about each citizen's individual vote. It’s so focused on winning overall states that it completely neglects the popular vote. It is mathematically possible under the Electoral College system that a candidate can win only 21.8% of the popular vote and still win the presidency.. This is due to the fact that the 39 smaller states have too many electoral votes for their population, and because of the winner-take-all system in every state except Nebraska and Maine, all a candidate needs to do is win 50.01% of the popular votes in those states, and he/she can clinch the election (Why We Should Abolish the Electoral College). Events similar to this have happened in history where the candidate who received more popular votes didn’t win the election. For example, in 1876

In presidential elections, citizens do not actually vote for the candidate of their choosing, instead citizens are voting for electors known as the Electoral College. The Electoral College chooses a President, and Vice President. The Constitution gives each state a number of electors that equals the number of House of

The electoral college has been choosing a president for the United States of America for hundred of years. The college has been put in effect in 1787 in order to balance the needs of large and small states. But this has stopped people from choosing their wanted president. The electoral vote has trumped the popular vote many times during presidential election. The electoral college is an unfair voting system which can favor mostly large states and limit the say of people in choosing their leader.

After the 2016 presidential election, the electoral college began to be a widely- debated topic. The electoral college has many reasons to be kept as the way the United States elects its presidents. The electoral college allows for representation throughout the country as opposed to focusing on large areas of the population, it also boosts minority interests, keeps the United States from becoming tyrannical, and presidential candidates pay attention to the fly over states.

Was Antifederalist 72 correct in saying the government would be too big and the people would be better off self-governing if we don't have a president and electoral college? In the year 1788 an anonymous writer by the name of Republicus sent an article to the Kentucky Gazette in March. The paper spoke of how the writer has a firm belief that the president would be too powerful and the voting system of electors seemed inefficient in the fact that the voter may not know what they are voting for. The president and electoral college need to be in place, despite the people having the power to self-govern, because history and my argument points will show you how it is better to have the right man for the job rather than everyone have a little knowledge

The answer is simple while the founding fathers were able to make the rules in advance for the future there has already been several amendments to our constitution in fact and one involving the Electoral College itself as mentioned in the third paragraph above, the 12th amendment. So what exactly changed well, originally the way the first Electoral College was set up made it so the runner-up would always become vice president, but a problem could easily be seen in this system. The two candidates would almost never have the same agenda, this in turn would have disagreements occur between the them and not allow the country to be ran properly so an amendment was made in 1804. This amendment allowed there to be two separate ballots for both president and vice president. The way this process would be carried out was the electors would meet in their states and decide who the president and vice president will be. The electors could not be a senator, republican, person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States. They’re supposed to be neutral but sometimes, there would be a few electors who will already be leaning toward one presidential

Certain philosophies of the Electoral College infringe on the democracy that the United States of America stands for; however, the Electoral College was put in place by the Founding Fathers for a reason, and under the Constitution that reason should be respected. American Democracy suffers under the overbearing nature of this voting system, but it is a fact that a pure democracy would never work. Under this system, there would always be an inferior minority. Reforming the system is a solution to this problem of whether or not the Electoral College should continue or cease to exist. There should still be a system of electors, but instead of the warped winner-take-all system, the votes should be given proportionally to the popular vote. This

Although controversial, the Electoral College has both advantages and disadvantages. In his series on Exploring Constitutional Law, Douglas O. Linder, explains the Electoral College protects minorities from the majority. He shows that the states are important in electing our president. However, he states that most Americans think that the popular vote makes more sense (n.d). A president can lose the popular vote and win the election, which some people think is unfair. Still, as the adage goes, "You don't fix what ain't

An Amendment to Replace the Electoral College with a Direct Popular Vote Five of the fifty-eight total United States Presidential elections in history have ended in discrepancies between the popular vote and the electoral vote; on average, the president elected into office was not actually favored by the majority of Americans

The office of the President of the United States is designed differently than many other nations “rulers”, however, it is quite similar to the government in Mexico. In the United States, the President has to go through a selection process to become the candidate of their chosen party. The registered voters in America select a party to vote for and vote for that party’s nominee. The nominee then campaigns for the general election, where the registered voters vote for Electoral College votes to elect the next president. The winner is the President with the most Electoral College votes (even if they do not win the popular vote) (Ellis 25-71). Similarly, to electing the President of the United States, the process to elect the president of Mexico

The Electoral College in the United States is not a place but a process. It was a process our founding fathers established in the Constitution. It is a complicated voting system that most citizens today do not understand. The Electoral College has been in place for well

The Electoral College The Electoral College in the United States is not a place but a process. It was a process our founding fathers established in the Constitution. It is a complicated voting system that most citizens today do not understand. The Electoral College has been in place

In 2000, as the election approached, some observers thought that Bush, interestingly also the son of a former president, could win the popular vote, but that his opponent, Gore, could win the Electoral College vote because Gore was leading in certain big states, such as California, New York and Pennsylvania. In the end, Gore secured the popular vote, but Bush won by securing the majority of votes in the Electoral College.