Should The Electoral College Be Abolished Dbq Essay
The founding fathers were not gods. Consequently, they were not perfect, and neither were the systems they set up to run the country. Nevertheless, they knew that things would change, and they set up ways to fix the government when needed. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote that the American people have the right to alter or abolish the government if it does not fit their needs. The Electoral College is flawed, and the American people need to replace it because this system does not fairly represent the people, it forces people to vote a certain way, and it does not always guarantee that the winner of the popular vote will win the election. These imperfections in the Electoral College make voters feel like their votes
…show more content…
In the 2000 election, Al Gore and Ralph Nader split the left wing vote. (Document 5). While Nader only won 3% of the popular vote, the election was so close that 3% more of the popular vote would have put Gore in office. (Document 5). This also happened in the 1912 election, when the Republicans split the vote between the incumbent Roosevelt, and Taft, allowing Wilson to win. The voters know that this will always be the result, so they do not vote for the party that their beliefs align with the closest. Instead, they vote Republican or Democrat to actually have a chance of winning the election. Third party candidates cannot win not only because of our two-party system, but because of our winner-take-all system. If two candidates split the liberal vote, the conservative party will win all the votes in that state. If this trend continues, the conservative party will win the entire election. (Document 6). If the United States based elections on the popular vote instead of the Electoral College, then people would be more likely to vote with the party they agree with most, not the party that is more likely to win. This would make citizens actually want to vote because they have more options and they would feel like their vote actually
In the 2000 election, Al Gore and Ralph Nader split the left wing vote. (Document 5). While Nader only won 3% of the popular vote, the election was so close that 3% more of the popular vote would have put Gore in office. (Document 5). This also happened in the 1912 election, when the Republicans split the vote between the incumbent Roosevelt, and Taft, allowing Wilson to win. The voters know that this will always be the result, so they do not vote for the party that their beliefs align with the closest. Instead, they vote Republican or Democrat to actually have a chance of winning the election. Third party candidates cannot win not only because of our two-party system, but because of our winner-take-all system. If two candidates split the liberal vote, the conservative party will win all the votes in that state. If this trend continues, the conservative party will win the entire election. (Document 6). If the United States based elections on the popular vote instead of the Electoral College, then people would be more likely to vote with the party they agree with most, not the party that is more likely to win. This would make citizens actually want to vote because they have more options and they would feel like their vote actually