Electoral College Vs Popular Vote
The Electoral College is a group that consists of electors who determine the succeeding president. The system has been functioning ever since the Founding Fathers established this in the Constitution. The Electoral College system has never been changed, nor has it been disregarded as a whole, but should it? The Electoral College should no longer be kept as a means to decide who the next president should be, instead the popular vote should be used for the task. The popular vote directly reveals the candidate that the people want as president. The Electoral College is not a democratic system to use in a nation that exemplifies itself as the most definitive democracy. The system also discourages people from taking part in the right to vote. The
…show more content…
popular vote should dictate who the next president should be, not a group of individuals compared to what an entire nation believes.
To start out with, the popular vote aligns to what the people believe as the best president while the Electoral College does not. The electoral system does not accurately reflect who the people want as the next president. A time when the popular vote surpassed the electoral vote was in the 2000 presidential election. According to the article, In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President, it states that in the 2000 presidential election that “Gore had more popular votes than Bush yet fewer electoral votes”. Al Gore was the person the people wanted as president, but was not meant to be in the position because of the lack of electoral votes necessary to win. As a result, people were outraged, having a president that a majority did not want. The popular vote swayed towards Al Gore being the desired president, however Bush had more electoral votes, contradicting to the favored candidate for the position. Additionally, the winner-take-all system makes candidates more aimed towards gathering a large amount of electoral votes from “swing” states. Candidates focus on these states to achieve a winning advantage while they “don’t spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning”, as stated from the article The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong. People do not get to know much about the candidates if their state is disregarded, making them left out of attention. People want a president that actually cares about the people, not electoral votes to win the position. Determining the next president should not be based upon getting the attention of swing states but a whole nation which makes the Electoral College system flawed when compared to the popular vote. The article that strongly argued against the Electoral College used previously also mentions that “Given that many voters vote one party for president and another for Congress, the House’s selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people”. Whatever choice the House decides upon, it may not align with what the people believe, making the electoral system a blatantly terrible way to reflect the will of the people. Defenders of the Electoral College have argued that the popular vote has only surpassed the electoral vote twice and rarely occurs. Although this is true, we cannot afford to have another time when the people have an unwanted president just because that person won the electoral votes, anything can occur even when the possibilities seem unlikely. The president should be determined by the people not a group of selected individuals or else there will be outrage just like the 2000 presidential election. The popular vote conveys who the people want as president accurately, while the electoral system is not a worthy way to determine it.
Furthermore, the Electoral College is not a democratic process to pick a president.
The electoral system is “regarded as an anachronism, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be [overruled] by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner” as pointed out in the article In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our desired method of choosing the president. The United States was founded upon the ideologies of freedom and representative government, which begs the question, why would we have a non-democratic method to decide the most powerful person in a nation where democracy remains as a provocative principle? The Electoral College is not a true democratic way to choose a president as a popular vote is. Equally importantant, is the belief of “faithless” electors. The article that was previously cited choosing against the Electoral College states that “’faithless’ electors have occasionally refused to vote for whomever they please”. These “faithless” electors are chosen to choose president that the people want them to choose but they ultimately change their minds. Getting rid of the Electoral College would ensure that untrustworthy electors would never betray the people putting the voting power in the hands of the people. According to the article, that was previously mentioned defending the Electoral College, it states that the electoral system “is not democratic in a modern sense… it is the electors who elect the president, not the people”. People cannot specifically elect the president, instead that job goes to the electors. Many people believe that we are voting for the president but in actuality we are not. A group of electors versus an entire nation in the choice of the president would obviously be determined by the peoples’ choice based on a belief of a democracy, but we still cling onto the Electoral College as the primary process. Many people have argued that if the popular vote were to be
considered to identify the president, then it would solely be based on who is the most popular and citizens would not consider which candidate is the best overall for the nation. This argument is not a correct depiction of what would happen if the popular vote were to be used because people would finally care about their vote and people would become more interested in political matters to cause real change in a more democratic way. The electoral system is nothing but a non-democratic way to elect a president, instead the popular vote should be used.
Moreover, is that the usage of the Electoral College system turns down the voter turnout. According to the article that was used earlier defending the Electoral College system, it states that “the Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state”. Voters are discouraged to vote when their candidate makes choices to not participate gaining a presence in their state and are disregarded. Determining the president by the popular vote would make candidates more influential in various states and keep voters involved. On the same article that defended the Electoral College system, it is mentioned voters “Knowing their vote will have no effect, they have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked by popular vote”. This implies that voters will not vote since their vote virtually almost has no effect on who the president would be. People want to actually vote for the president, not elector who vote instead of the people. The article as used previously that called for an abolishment of the Electoral College states that “Can voters control whom their electors vote for? Not always”. Sometimes, electors will simply vote for another person instead of the person that the people wanted them to vote for. These “faithless” electors discourage people into trusting the electors and the whole entire Electoral College since their vote does not have any effect to whom an elector chooses. Although people have said that voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than a single vote determining an election, it can be argued that people will become more involved in an election where their vote actually matters rather than by the hand of the Electoral College. People would be more likely to become more informative in politics compared to today if the popular vote were to be taken into account. Allowing the Electoral College to keep on being used will only demoralize one’s belief that their vote actually counts when it really does not.
As younger generations grow up, they need to realize that their vote does not truly account towards determining the president. People today should realize that we are in a democracy, where the people choose who comes into power. We the people need to express a more democratic way for us to truly vote for someone we want, not in the hands of a group of individuals, but by the popular vote. Our society is rapidly changing, which makes for more possibilities that could happen, it just depends on you how you do it. A time when the popular vote identifies the president will occur only if you truly dedicate yourself into having a voice in government, to make it a more democratic country that no longer uses the Electoral College system. The popular vote is the one process that we should use to encourage people to vote and it aligns to who the people want as their president. The popular vote should be used to indicate who the president should be to make the people glad they voted and feel a sense of involvement in the government rather than the Electoral College, it can only be achieved if you contribute to speaking up for what the people believe.
popular vote should dictate who the next president should be, not a group of individuals compared to what an entire nation believes.
To start out with, the popular vote aligns to what the people believe as the best president while the Electoral College does not. The electoral system does not accurately reflect who the people want as the next president. A time when the popular vote surpassed the electoral vote was in the 2000 presidential election. According to the article, In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President, it states that in the 2000 presidential election that “Gore had more popular votes than Bush yet fewer electoral votes”. Al Gore was the person the people wanted as president, but was not meant to be in the position because of the lack of electoral votes necessary to win. As a result, people were outraged, having a president that a majority did not want. The popular vote swayed towards Al Gore being the desired president, however Bush had more electoral votes, contradicting to the favored candidate for the position. Additionally, the winner-take-all system makes candidates more aimed towards gathering a large amount of electoral votes from “swing” states. Candidates focus on these states to achieve a winning advantage while they “don’t spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning”, as stated from the article The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong. People do not get to know much about the candidates if their state is disregarded, making them left out of attention. People want a president that actually cares about the people, not electoral votes to win the position. Determining the next president should not be based upon getting the attention of swing states but a whole nation which makes the Electoral College system flawed when compared to the popular vote. The article that strongly argued against the Electoral College used previously also mentions that “Given that many voters vote one party for president and another for Congress, the House’s selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people”. Whatever choice the House decides upon, it may not align with what the people believe, making the electoral system a blatantly terrible way to reflect the will of the people. Defenders of the Electoral College have argued that the popular vote has only surpassed the electoral vote twice and rarely occurs. Although this is true, we cannot afford to have another time when the people have an unwanted president just because that person won the electoral votes, anything can occur even when the possibilities seem unlikely. The president should be determined by the people not a group of selected individuals or else there will be outrage just like the 2000 presidential election. The popular vote conveys who the people want as president accurately, while the electoral system is not a worthy way to determine it.
Furthermore, the Electoral College is not a democratic process to pick a president.
The electoral system is “regarded as an anachronism, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be [overruled] by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner” as pointed out in the article In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our desired method of choosing the president. The United States was founded upon the ideologies of freedom and representative government, which begs the question, why would we have a non-democratic method to decide the most powerful person in a nation where democracy remains as a provocative principle? The Electoral College is not a true democratic way to choose a president as a popular vote is. Equally importantant, is the belief of “faithless” electors. The article that was previously cited choosing against the Electoral College states that “’faithless’ electors have occasionally refused to vote for whomever they please”. These “faithless” electors are chosen to choose president that the people want them to choose but they ultimately change their minds. Getting rid of the Electoral College would ensure that untrustworthy electors would never betray the people putting the voting power in the hands of the people. According to the article, that was previously mentioned defending the Electoral College, it states that the electoral system “is not democratic in a modern sense… it is the electors who elect the president, not the people”. People cannot specifically elect the president, instead that job goes to the electors. Many people believe that we are voting for the president but in actuality we are not. A group of electors versus an entire nation in the choice of the president would obviously be determined by the peoples’ choice based on a belief of a democracy, but we still cling onto the Electoral College as the primary process. Many people have argued that if the popular vote were to be
considered to identify the president, then it would solely be based on who is the most popular and citizens would not consider which candidate is the best overall for the nation. This argument is not a correct depiction of what would happen if the popular vote were to be used because people would finally care about their vote and people would become more interested in political matters to cause real change in a more democratic way. The electoral system is nothing but a non-democratic way to elect a president, instead the popular vote should be used.
Moreover, is that the usage of the Electoral College system turns down the voter turnout. According to the article that was used earlier defending the Electoral College system, it states that “the Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state”. Voters are discouraged to vote when their candidate makes choices to not participate gaining a presence in their state and are disregarded. Determining the president by the popular vote would make candidates more influential in various states and keep voters involved. On the same article that defended the Electoral College system, it is mentioned voters “Knowing their vote will have no effect, they have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked by popular vote”. This implies that voters will not vote since their vote virtually almost has no effect on who the president would be. People want to actually vote for the president, not elector who vote instead of the people. The article as used previously that called for an abolishment of the Electoral College states that “Can voters control whom their electors vote for? Not always”. Sometimes, electors will simply vote for another person instead of the person that the people wanted them to vote for. These “faithless” electors discourage people into trusting the electors and the whole entire Electoral College since their vote does not have any effect to whom an elector chooses. Although people have said that voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a political preference rather than a single vote determining an election, it can be argued that people will become more involved in an election where their vote actually matters rather than by the hand of the Electoral College. People would be more likely to become more informative in politics compared to today if the popular vote were to be taken into account. Allowing the Electoral College to keep on being used will only demoralize one’s belief that their vote actually counts when it really does not.
As younger generations grow up, they need to realize that their vote does not truly account towards determining the president. People today should realize that we are in a democracy, where the people choose who comes into power. We the people need to express a more democratic way for us to truly vote for someone we want, not in the hands of a group of individuals, but by the popular vote. Our society is rapidly changing, which makes for more possibilities that could happen, it just depends on you how you do it. A time when the popular vote identifies the president will occur only if you truly dedicate yourself into having a voice in government, to make it a more democratic country that no longer uses the Electoral College system. The popular vote is the one process that we should use to encourage people to vote and it aligns to who the people want as their president. The popular vote should be used to indicate who the president should be to make the people glad they voted and feel a sense of involvement in the government rather than the Electoral College, it can only be achieved if you contribute to speaking up for what the people believe.