In some states such as Texas, California, and New York, it is clear before the election which elector or party they are voting for. If that elector is the opposite of the one you would vote for and you know the majority people in that state are going to vote for him, why should you even vote? Does your vote really count? The answer is no, it does not. This causes a depression in voter turnout.
In reality, at the end of the election, the popular vote which can easy be labeled as what the citizens want doesn’t count. Take the 2008 election for example, Al Gore received the majority of the popular vote, he had a huge advantage in popular votes however because of the Electoral College and it’s presidential electors, George Bush was elected president, and we all know how that turn out. Similar events
Under the system of the Electoral College each state had the same number of electoral votes as they have representative in Congress, thus no state could have less than 3. However, times have moved on since 1787 and the Electoral College debatably is only a constitutional formality and could therefore be replaced by a national popular vote. One of the main reasons why it makes sense to replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote as it ensures democracy, as winning the Electoral College does not guarantee a majority of the popular vote. The most recent example of this
According to the Missouri Election Board in Jackson County, “..We end up with two large, pragmatic political parties which tend to the center of public opinion rather than dozens of smaller political parties catering to divergent and sometimes extremist views.” In the direct popular vote, many presidents representing minor, regional parties will run, causing problems such as the disruption from an electoral majority. They will represent regional, localized ideas and have small, decentralized platforms. Under the direct popular vote, it allows presidential candidates with localized ideas take office and neglect the need for national appeal. Anybody with a large base of support would be able to win. The overwhelming majority could be from the presidential
How were candidates for president chosen? Jeffersonian Democracy – Candidates for presidency were chosen by meetings of political leaders. The meetings were called caucuses. In the conferences groups of people convened and talked about who should be chosen. Jacksonian Democracy – Because of the introduction of political parties, nominating conventions chose candidates for president during Jacksonian Democracy.
The warrant for the first argument is that the Electoral College has too much power and the people really do not really have the choice in full like a true democracy should. The next is that the Electoral College almost creates a no use to vote attitude towards others who have a minority opinion. Due to the Electoral College the states votes are given to the majority in that state. In this system the minority opinion is not even shown. Then the warrant for the third argument is that Al Gore was elected by the people but because of the Electoral College he was not elected into office.
The Electoral College was a compromise written into the U. S. Constitution in 1787, with the result that the President and Vice President are not elected directly by the people but by Presidential Electors. Whichever party slate wins the most popular votes in the state becomes that state’s electors—so that, in effect, whichever presidential ticket gets the most popular votes in a state wins all the electors of that
The Electoral College When millions of people cast their vote for the next president of the United State, most don’t know how their vote is counted. The Electoral College system was developed by the framers of the U.S. Constitution, article II, section 1. Many controversy come up when the Electoral College is discussed. With over 700 proposals to eliminate or ratify, the Electoral College it obviously has some defects. The Electoral College system counts votes within the states and, depending on the majority, the state is classified as red or blue (republican or democrat).
Both the national government and the local governments make decisions for the electorate and are given legitimacy to do so. However, it can be argued that the representative system is not fully carried out in the UK. Britain follows a representative system because most citizens over the age of 18 have the opportunity to elect our national and local government. These elections are free and are carried out using the first-past-the-post system, which means that the party with the highest number of seats wins. It also means that generally we are governed by one party, which increases stability; for example, since 1900 there have only been three coalition governments in power.
Electoral College The most usual proposal for "reform" is to simply do away with the Electoral College and have a direct vote by the people. This has advantages and disadvantages, of course. The advantage would be that this would be a truer exercise in democracy. As we saw in the 2000 election, it is possible to win the presidency even if fewer people vote for you than for your opponent. That seems wrong.