The Electoral College is one of the most controversial features of the American political system. It has been around for many years and has played a significant role in politics. This complex system comes with many advantages and disadvantages. The Electoral College is a system that is used every 4 years when voters nominate a set of electors who are responsible for electing the President and Vice President. The number of votes a state receives in the Electoral College is based on the state’s population. The presidential candidate who reaches 270 electoral votes is declared the winner. This system was designed in order to prevent large states from overpowering smaller states. However, there are many flaws that come with this unique system. …show more content…
Due to how the system was designed, third party candidates struggle to win enough electoral votes. Moreover, the electoral college should be removed from America due to the challenges third party candidates face. For instance, in the 1992 Presidential election, it is demonstrated how many votes each candidate received. Bill Clinton received 43% of the popular vote and 370 electoral votes while George H.W. Bush received 37% of the popular vote but only 168 electoral votes. However, a third party candidate, Ross Perot, gains 18% of the popular vote but does not gain any electoral votes. This data demonstrates the low chances of a third party candidate being able to gain any electoral votes. The system clearly disproportionately gives out electoral votes, making it especially difficult for third party candidates to win any elections. Additionally, in the 2000 presidential election, a third party candidate, Nader, went up against Gore and G.W. Bush. While Gore obtains 266 electoral votes, Bush receives 271, automatically making him the winner. On the other hand, the third party candidate, Nader, received a total of zero electoral votes, even though he gained 2,882,955 popular votes. This information displays the lack of proportion used while granting electoral votes. This is important because it demonstrates the inequality and disadvantages third parties face while running for presidential elections. Overall, the Electoral College does not grant advantages towards third party candidates, as they are often
Electoral College has been in United States for a long period of time. The system was formed to select a president through an indirect election and to avoid suspicion of corruption and belief of compromised votes, but the Electoral College never worked as it was intended to work by founding fathers. There are many pros and cons for this system but one of the major con of this system is that people in the U.S. doesn’t think that their opinions about choosing president really matters because of the Electoral College and I also feel the same way about it. I think there are more cons of Electoral College than pros. One the major con is that people in U.S don’t feel that their vote matters because Electoral College redistributes its vote every
Because of the winner-takes-all system, some presidents have won the election without the majority of the popular vote. In the 48 states that use the winner-takes-all system, whichever candidate wins that state’s popular vote receives all of the electoral votes for that particular state. The data gathered from the 2000 election demonstrates that despite winning the popular vote by about 540,000 votes, Al Gore proceeded to lose the election to George W. Bush by only 5 electoral votes. Florida’s 29 electoral votes were the deciding factor in this election. Because of the winner-takes-all system, when Bush won the popular vote in Florida, he was awarded with these votes, costing Gore the election.
In its favor, one may argue that it supports smaller states, creates more stability within the election due to the two-party system, and prevents the chances of recounting votes. However, the Electoral College is also believed to be “complicated” by cause of its unique representative system, persuade candidates into giving more attention to the smaller states, and be a magnet for faithless Electors, or Electors who decide to not vote for their party’s candidate (Veracity
Real Clear Politics asserts that there would be an abundance of candidates if the Electoral College were abolished in favor of a system in which a candidate needed a majority of the popular vote to win the presidency. This demonstrates
“There is a huge payday if you win 51%+ of the vote, and no benefit if you don’t” (“Problems with US Elections: Winner-takes-all Electoral System”). Candidates who do not win in a state get nothing if they do not manage to win the majority. By ignoring most of the population’s votes, the electoral college fails to accurately represent the will of the nation as a whole. By doing this, the electoral college further discourages people from voting. The over-complicated process makes voters feel as if their votes do not actually matter or make a difference.
Under this system, every state is given a certain number of electoral votes based on its population. While this means that larger states have more electoral votes, smaller states are not completely ignored. In fact, small states are overrepresented in the Electoral College, as they have more electoral votes per capita than larger states. This means that the presidential candidates must consider the interests of small states while campaigning, which helps to prevent them from focusing solely on the issues that affect large urban areas.
The US’s Electoral College has always been a controversial topic. When it was written into the Constitution, it was meant as a compromise between the small and large states, and between Congress and the states (M. West). Since then, the Electoral College system has been how the United States elected its presidents. However, it continues to face criticism and many want the system to change, favoring systems such as a national popular vote instead (National Conference of State Legislatures). Despite how the US’s Electoral College effectively balances power between the states and the federal government, it is still a deeply flawed voting system due to it being based on unrealistic expectations and outdated ideals that should be changed to reflect
The electoral college which was established at the same time that the rest of the three branches were set up, has been heralded as one of, if not the most controversial part of the modern government. Created in the constitution in Article Two, the Electoral College is a process in which the United States chooses its Chief Executive, the president. The Electoral College is made up of 538 members who are chosen, most often, by state party conventions (there is no exact way that is required for the choosing of states’ electors). Once the popular vote is collected the electors pledge themselves to a candidate, normally the person who won the popular vote but not always. This means that sometimes there will be a disparity between who wins the popular
Therefore, it is difficult to support the claim that the Electoral College was created to benefit slavery. Another argument against the Electoral College is that it renders rural and small states irrelevant. This argument suggests that the Electoral College gives too
Isaac Allen Mr. Baker American Government 2/28/23 Electoral College The Electoral College is a unique feature of the United States’ electoral system, which has been in place since the country’s founding. The Electoral College can be viewed as a compromise between electing a president via the popular vote versus by Congress alone. Over time arguments have been made regarding the need for the electoral college. Despite these criticisms, the Electoral College system an integral part of American democracy and should be kept in place.
The Electoral College plays a very important role in the presidential election. The founding fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president by a vote in congress and election of the president by a popular vote of qualified citizens. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. Sad to say that gaining all the popular votes doesn 't guarantee you a win. On four occasions, the winner of the popular vote did not capture the presidency.
Is our voting system fair? The Electoral College should be abolished, due to third parties having no representation, the case of an electoral tie, and the violation of political equality. First, third party candidates are nowhere seen in electoral votes. Within the popular vote, the third party candidate is clearly represented (Doc B). On the other hand, they always end up with 0% of the electoral votes (Doc B).
The Electoral College system the founding fathers devised helps to balance out the power of the large, populous states. This system forces candidates to campaign in all states since they all carry some sway in the elections (“Understanding the Presidential Election”). However, other issues present themselves as well, like states with large independent voters that can be swayed and the issue that a candidate can lose the popular vote and win the election. The first issue is that states that are equally divided between democrats and republicans and hold a large number of electoral votes like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania are considered swing states. (“Understanding the Presidential Election”)
Along with keeping balance between the states, the Electoral College also helps keep independent parties under
Swing states are also major factors in an election, with what ever candidate winning them normally wining. These make it possible for a candidate to have won more states, but not a lot of Electoral votes and for a candidate to win the popular vote, but not the Electoral College. One incident of this was when in 2000 when Al Gore had received more popular votes while George Bush had the most electoral votes, and became president. Incidents like this have led people to be split on the usefulness of the Electoral College.