Swing States Advantages

With that said, it means that the populous vote of American’s doesn’t really count. This process does not give the people the constitutional right to vote for a president, they are actually voting for an elector that is supposed to represent them and vote in favor of the populous vote for that state. There is also a discrepancy with the number of electors given to each state, which then makes votes in one state worth much more than those in others due to population. This process highlights swing vote states and smaller states as presidential candidates focus more time trying to capture their votes and other states get ignored. (Lenz and Holman, 2016). There has been four times in history that the popular vote did not lead to that candidate winning the election due to the electoral vote: John Quincy Adams (1824), Rutherford B. Hayes (1876), Benjamin Harris (1888) and George Bush (2000) all did not receive the popular vote, but won the election due to electoral votes. This process could also lead to fewer voters coming out to the polls if they believe their state is already voting in their favor with the

Since the electoral vote is partially based on the state’s representatives in the House, the most populated states have more votes. This can be evidenced above with the four most populated states in the nation, California, Texas, Florida and New York, having the four highest electoral votes in the nation. The question of to whom the state’s electoral votes go to is decided by an elector. An elector is someone who decides to which candidate the state’s electoral votes goes to, electors are instructed to award the votes to whomever wins the state popular vote. However, electors can go against these instructions. Most electors pledge to keep to those instructions but sometimes an elector will cast the state’s electoral against the instructions, these electors are known as “faithless” electors. Due to “faithless” electors, nine electoral votes have been cast against instruction since 1820. Thankfully, none of these votes changed the outcome of any election.

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

Ohio: The Buckeye State is called the “most important state in the country” when it comes to electing a president, and for good reason. History shows that since 1944 no candidate has ever made it to the oval office without Ohio’s 18 electoral votes. Voters in Ohio have always succeeded with their votes; which means whoever the vote for is the one that gets elected. Republicans are fully aware of this fact and thus made Cleveland as their host city. History shows that Hillary Clinton won the state of Ohio in her first presidential bid in 2008 and she is still leading against all potential candidates by at least 10%, shown by the current poll results. On a recent poll after the second Presidential debate between Clinton

The electoral vote allotment is based on the population of each state, collected from the census. This method of division leads to severe imbalances between the decisions of small states and the decisions of the larger states. In 2010, Alaska, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, North Dakota, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming had a total amount of 44 electoral votes. Illinois, a single state, had 20. This means that one sole state had as many electoral votes as six states put together. While the electoral system is usually unfair to smaller states, in the case of ties, the larger states suffer the most. When the electoral vote is tied, each state can only cast one vote for the final decision, meaning that a “representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters,” according to Bradford Plumer, author of the article “The Indefensible Electoral College.” No matter what happens during the election, one group is always being cheated out of their rightful votes. The choice of our country’s leader should not be based on a system that is unfair to a specific group of voters simply due to their state

In June of 1804 the states had ratified the Twelfth Amendment which enacted the Electoral College in time for the 1804 election. When election time comes, Americans vote for the President and Vice President who are chosen by Presidential electors, who as a whole are known as the Electoral College. As a decision was needed for a method of choosing candidates, the Constitutional Convention of 1787 contemplated many different ways of electing the President, but toward the end of the proposals and ideas the matter had to be taken to the Committee of Eleven on Postponed Matters which is the committee who conceived the original Electoral College. In recent years, much debate has been stirring regarding whether or not the Electoral College has a place within this country's elections. For many states this method of tallying and casting votes is great because every state receives a minimum of three electoral votes considering each state has two senators and at least one representative (Lewis). However, these minimum electoral votes make the distribution of electoral college votes uneven throughout the fifty states, making each American citizen's vote count less or much more which is cause for change. If the information on these weighted votes is analyzed it can be concluded that states with a population similar to Wyoming has one “elector” for every 177, 556 persons while Texas has one “elector” for every 715,499 persons. While the Electoral College has worked for generations, there are some negative factors that give cause to abolish this practice, such that are; faithless electors, the winner take all system, and finally, safe and swing states.

As the pillars of the electoral college collapse under the tests of time, the institution itself becomes obsolete. First, the concept of, “Winner Takes All,” means that if an election splits 49%-51%, then the smaller party’s votes are virtually erased. This system represents only the majority party in each state, thus effectively silencing all other parties. Additionally, basing the number of electors on the members in both houses of Congress creates an unequal distribution of votes across the states. Due to their infamously low population, Wyoming should statistically have only one elector, but the addition of their two senators brings them to a total of three electors. This means that each of Wyoming’s votes represents less people than every other state. For instance, each of Texas’s 38 votes represents 733,157 people while each of Wyoming’s votes represents 195,157 people. Therefore, the votes of the people of Wyoming are worth 26.62% more than that of Texans. The inequality of voting power between states combined with the “winner take all” system method of tallying votes projects an inaccurate portrayal of will of the American people.

Recognizing the strong regional interests and loyalties which have played so great a role in American history, the Electoral College system contributes to the cohesiveness of the country be requiring a distribution of popular support to be elected president. Without such a mechanism, the president would be selected either through the domination of one populous region over the others or through the domination of large metropolitan areas over the rural ones. Indeed, it is principally because of the Electoral College that presidential nominees are inclined to select vice presidential running mates from a region other than their own. For as things stand now, no one region contains the absolute majority (270) of electoral votes required to elect a president. Thus, there is an incentive for presidential candidates to pull together

To secure the win the candidate must pass 270 of the electoral votes and even though seemed to be ahead of the race having more popular votes Trump passed 270 electoral votes just hours after the polls closed. Donald won 279 of the electoral votes while Hillary only won 228. Regardless of whether Trump had more or less of the popular votes it all comes down to the electoral votes. Although Trump has made many racist comments and angered many Hispanics he surprisingly won a lot of their votes which helped his victory with the electorate vote; As for African American voter the electorate vote went down slightly.(7 reasons) Compared to Obama Hillary just didn't do as well as he did when it comes to electoral votes and the popular vote. Trump on the other hand won the states of Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Ohio, all which voted for Obama both elections. Trump was not only lucky by winning over states who were expected to be won by Hillary but got a lot of help when Hillary's email incident sparked outrage in many

The Electoral College is something that affects every citizen in this country. The Presidential election is also something that many people feel passionate about, regardless of where you are. In the Presidential Election, Minnesota has voted for the democratic candidate almost every time in the last 100 years. However, Waconia has not been the best representation of the state's views, since it is one of the most conservative cities in the nation, making it a very unique place to live, politically. Because I have lived in Waconia and Minnesota my whole life, I have seen both sides of the Electoral College and how it affects my surroundings. The Electoral College is valuable for this state in the sense that it gives Minnesota some importance come election, even if we do vote democratic nine times out of ten. For the city of Waconia, the Electoral College might make citizens here think it is not the best system since most republican voters might feel like their votes mean nothing in the end, because of the consistent trend of this state voting for the democratic candidate.

The Electoral College is the system the United States have used to elect the President for the past two hundred years. In this essay, the reader will see that although it did the best way to represent the will of the American people, and in this essay a better alternative will be proposed to the reader. The Electoral college was created in September sixth, nineteen-eighty-seven, and was described as (founder definition) and was meant to allow a stronger South, who by using the three-fifths compromise of 1787 to allow themselves more votes and ensure they are given the most federal power (Amar). This paper will show the reader that the Electoral College is flawed in the way that minority candidates can be elected, less populated states are overrepresented, and swing states are given the most attention.

Larger states, like California and Texas, are a main focus for candidates because of the number of electoral votes that they would earn. Also, a president can be elected, even if he or she does not represent the ideas or opinions of the people. In rare cases, a president can win the popular vote and lose the electoral college vote. “If this is the case, the very large margins secured by the losing candidate in the other states would add up to over 50% of the ballots cast nationally. Therefore, the losing candidate may have gained more than 50% of the ballots cast by voters,” says “Does Your Vote Count? The Electoral College Explained”. If the people vote for a particular candidate, that candidate should be president. Finally, people who disagree with their states are not represented due to the “‘winner take all’” system. A person may vote for the democratic candidate but the republican

Candidates won't bother campaigning in California or Texas because they know it's Democratic or Republican so that means swing states matter more and have more say in a presidential cycle. This equally mutes the minority voters in both of these states. Furthermore, the issues in small swing states often become key election issues, when they only really affect a small percentage of people.

The 2016 presidential election was an example of the discrepancy between the Electoral College votes and the national popular votes. If the last presidential election had been decided by a national popular vote, then Hillary Clinton would have won the presidency because she had the majority of votes. However, due to the design of the Electoral College, Donald Trump won the election for president in 2016; although, he lost the national popular vote. Just as some people questioned the effectiveness of the Electoral College during some of the previous elections, several people questioned the effectiveness of the Electoral College again in 2016. The debate about whether the Electoral College should be kept or

Two party, a state in which two major parties alternate in winning majorities, balances the southern and northern states. In general election southern voted Republican and northern voted Democrat. Party balance is important in it leans people to one party or other and the election can go either way. (Magleby 66)