When the candidates are running to be president, there are two systems of voting, the popularity vote and the Electoral College vote. The popularity vote is when the people vote, and choose which candidate they want for president, and then the people who run the polls look at the amount of votes each candidate gets. Which ever candidate gets the most votes in that state, normally gets all of that state 's Electoral votes. When it 's over they count up how may Electoral votes each candidate got.
Each state has a different amount of Electoral votes based off of population with s state such as Texas having 38 votes, while one like Vermont has three, and at least 270 Electoral votes are needed for a candidate to become president. 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.
The people who are
…show more content…
On the other side with the defenders of the Electoral College they believe that the Electoral College system is more fair. "In Defense of the Electoral College" states that it provides a certainty of outcome in that "if the difference of the popular vote is small, then if the winner of the popular vote were deemed winner of the presidential election, candidates would have an insensitive to seek a recount in any state." They also state that swing states are important because "they are likely to be the most thoughtful voters" "and the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the elections" giving their votes importance. They also say that it avoids having no candidate winning a