Realistic Effects Of The Electoral College

Many people argue that the Electoral College is an outdated system. After all, many things have changed in the last two centuries. For one, technology is much more advanced now than it was two hundred years ago. With the internet and television, we can now learn everything about a candidate regardless of where the come from in the nation. It is feasible to have direct election of a president because of these improved methods of communication and the evolution of technology in general.

Established in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, the Electoral College is a system utilized in The United States of America to select the President and Vice President. This process was established by the Founding Fathers in 1787, when the Constitution was written. The original purpose of the electoral system was to ensure that those who select the leaders of this nation were the most knowledgeable and informed people that America had to offer. The electors - the elected officials that make up the Electoral College - are elected to office through a general election wherein the entire national population has the right to vote. The President of the United States, however, is actually elected to office by the Electoral College only, regardless of the popular vote of the citizens in general. Thus, the Presidential election is the only federal election in our nation where the vote of the citizenry does not directly determine the victor. Despite the fact that this electoral system has been in place and operational for over two hundred years, the Electoral College is looked upon by some as an honorable system, whereas others view it as faulty. The Electoral College is not fair and equitable because it is based on population, it is not trusted by the people, and it is unjust to the wishes of the citizens.

Research suggests that the Electoral College system should be amended because it poorly illustrates democracy, is outdated and

Our Founding Fathers had great concern over the topic of the government obtaining too much power over the people and with that in mind they constructed a system of indirect election where citizens would choose an elector. That system would distant the citizens from directly electing the president, avoiding any possibility to create tyranny. Their fears were about whether citizens could exercise the best judgement and their capability to fully understand and make good choices in voting. They did not want a group to go off in the wrong direction and take control over others. They thought that a chosen group of more educated and elite individuals elected by the people would be able to better interpret the situation and exercise better judgement. In a way, they were trying to safeguard democracy by instituting the Electoral College as the method to elect our presidents.

In order to participate in major elections, third parties must first overcome a myriad of obstacles that have been put in place by both the founding fathers and politicians of our current two-party system. Rosenstone and his colleagues contend that the most important barrier in place to discourage the success of third parties is the plurality single-member districts that are the cornerstone of the American electoral process. Not only do single-member districts elect only one member to higher office, but they also allow such elections to occur without an electoral majority. If voters know that a third party is unlikely to receive a substantial amount of votes, they may believe a vote for the party would be a wasted vote. This requirement for a plurality of votes is especially detrimental for a third party presidential campaign, due to the fact that the Electoral College distributes electoral votes to the winner of each statewide vote (excluding Nebraska and Maine), and the only plausible way for a third party candidate to receive any electoral votes is to be extremely popular in a certain region of the United States. Unlike the two major

When the Constitutional Convention gathered in 1784 they had the difficult task of determining how our government should be assembled and what systems we should use to elect them. They quickly decided congress should have the powers to pass laws and the people should elect these people to ensure they are following the will of the people. But who should elect the president?

This can be found when during the 1980 election, when it was republican candidate Ronald Reagan was against democratic Jimmy Carter who were also against the independent candidate John B. Anderson. Each candidate won votes from the People, but when you focus on the third party candidate, you’ll notice that he received over five million votes from the United States citizens, but received zero votes from the Electoral College. The same thing happened during the 1992 election when democrat Bill Clinton was going against republican George H. W. Bush and independent Ross Perot. Mr. Perot received over 18 million votes from the People, over ten percent of the overall People’s votes, but zero from the Electoral College (Document B). Even though many citizens of the U.S support third party candidates, the Electoral College rarely ever votes for them, which is unjust to those who favor third parties over the two main parties. One of the only times the Electoral College voted for more than two different candidates was in 1824, which was only because all four of the candidates were democratic republicans (Document G). Supposedly, the Electoral College wants what is best for our country, but sometimes, third party candidates actually have very good ideas as to where to take our country, and take the time in thinking about what’s best for us when the two main parties are just trying to get more votes and recognition. In today’s world, there is no reason why the Electoral College should still

The continuation of the Electoral College is constantly debated. Some want to discontinue the system while others want keep it. There are several arguments used by those who want to continue the system. One argument by Electoral College Advocates is the Electoral College balances the power of the large and small states in elections. These advocates state that doing away with the Electoral College would give the states with larger populations too much power in the outcome of elections. The advocates feel that presidential candidates will spend their resources on the states with the largest amount of voters. These advocates also believe that the Electoral College protects minorities’ interests. Some believe that without the Electoral College candidates would spend their time and resources on the majority of nation because that is where most of the votes will come from. Some advocates also argue that the Electoral College helps maintain the federal character of the United States. They argue that the system gives both the people and the states an important role in the electing of a president.

After researching and learning about the Electoral College I have noticed some pros and cons of it. Manly I have found pros to why we need the Electoral College, but there are still cons to it. One of the biggest pros is that it promotes a two-party system. Once we try to get a third or fourth party into mix it just makes it harder to maintain and chose a side. Looking at the con side though, some will say that the Electoral College makes it hard for these independent parties’ voices to get heard and that they don’t have even have chance to Presidency. I don’t think that the intent was to not give voices to other parties, it is just less complicated to deal with just a two-party system. The intent of our Founding Fathers was to have a check

In every presidential election only one question matters: which candidate will get the 270 votes needed to win the Electoral College? It is what helped President Donald Trump to win the past election of 2016 - even though Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. How does this work? Clinton had more people vote for her yet Trump won. Looking back at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the Founding Fathers were trying to devise a way to elect a president. It was Edmund Randolph of Virginia who decided to make “corrections and enlargements in the Articles of Confederation,” (44, American Government, Power and Purpose) Keeping in mind

In 1787, the forebears conjured up the Constitution because they did not want to allow citizens to vote for their president undeviatingly . Afraid that society was not well equipped with information to select a president and that formidable common people would choose candidates from their own state, the forebearers considered that the president should be chosen through a selected group of electors, which they thought should be avowed as they contented. In this, political parties because very tenacious than they were before. These political group selected candidates and electors for the presidential and vice presidential positions. Electors were sworn to vote for their respected candidate. What is this Electoral College? The Electoral College

In addition, the Electoral College’s outcome does not demonstrate how a Democratic System should work. Third parties often get discouraged to run for presidency since they are unable to gain any strength do to the way the Electoral College is structured. Voters are often dissuaded to vote on states with a clear favorite, for they feel like their vote would not have an effect. The Electoral College gives power to smaller less populated states, which in turn boosts the electoral strength, thus traditionally favoring the Republican party. An advantage the Electoral College provides is the support of checks and balances as well as deliberation. This relates to the opinion of undermining the other government branches, thus preventing a tyranny. Often many people believe the Electoral College keeps the two-party system in place, and the third parties out of the election. Therefore, it provides our country with stability. The system also allows states to have freedom in designing their own laws regarding voting, thus offering them the ability to effect

The electoral college is an institution that every four years is in charge of electing our President, and Vice President. In school we are always taught that its the right and fair way to elect our president, but why? When the Founding Fathers created the process in 1787 along with the constitution certain founders such as James Madison thought the process would hurt the south and under a prior agreement set by southern slave states allowed states to count slaves as votes. This gave Southern States the majority of the electoral votes. In the first distribution of electoral votes Virginia(a heavy slave state) came out the big winner with over a quarter of the US votes where a state like Pennsylvania(a free state) had far less. The pro-Southern

People are educated enough to choose a president. People have said that the reason the electoral college was made was because they do not believe that the people are educated enough to make a good vote. Why do we have to be eighteen to vote, if our vote does not even matter? I do not have a problem with the primary voting age to be eighteen, but why does it matter, if our vote is not even counted? Candidates lie just to get into office. Can the electoral college really know whether a candidate is lying, better than the people can?

I appreciate the love, and optimism that your words carry. But as a teacher you and along others have always encouraged me to think critically and to empower myself, so here is my reply to your stance: