From Lugano to La Jolla....what a remarkable amalgam of ideas, insights, and perspectives. Welcome to this site. Mr. Izsa (TASIS) and Mrs. Shaul (LJCDS) invite you to join us in our conversations about the history and the realities of America's history and culture--from a decidedly international perspective.
Each month a new series of questions will be posted here by Mr. Izsa and Mrs. Shaul. Please click on the blog posts and write in your comments for the questions below, per your teacher's instructions.
Please make certain that entries are thoughtfully written (check for typos and grammatical faux pas), as erudite as you can make them, and appropriately worded for a school-related activity (note: students from other parts of the world may not share your same philosophies or your same sense of humor, so please be mindful of our differences).
With every blog session assigned, one or two can be direct responses to the questions, but at least one MUST respond directly to the students who have already written posts, answering one thread per question (more is welcome, this is the minimum requirement).Be specific. Explain why you might agree or disagree with their (his/her) opinions. Feel free to "debate" or "discuss" with your international counterpart. Make sure we can identify you with your name so you can receive credit for your contributions.
I'm two sided on this one. Yes, I believe in some instances that the electoral college can be a fair way to individual show each states loyalty to Rep. or Dem. But, I also can see how it is unfair. You see, the electoral college can extremely shift the votes by winning a few key states (ex; California, Florida, Texas). I believe that some of the states with a large number of electoral votes should be divided more equally. It's not fair for Republicans who live in California do always assume that they are going to loose because of the majority of the state is Democrat. This past election, 6 million people voted for Barack Obama is California. How many do you think voted for Romney? 4 million. So yes I believe it's a great tool for future election as it shows a states loyalty but I also believe it's unfair for some states that have a huge number of electoral votes because it gives one party an advantage. In theory, I think having it be decided by popular vote is a fairer way to elect a president.
I agree with John's idea of having the elections decided by popular vote because in electoral college, the individual looses his power to vote. A democrat who lives in a republican country will throw away his vote if given to the other side. Like this case, millions of votes will not be considered, plus, practically only the states that do not have a majority will decide the outcome of the elections.
I agree with John when he said ,"I also believe it's unfair for some states that have a huge number of electoral votes because it gives one party an advantage. In theory, I think having it be decided by popular vote is a fairer way to elect a president." I believe it is unfair that there is a possibility that the president can win without the population's approval meaning the president can only win with electoral votes and not with popularity votes. I think it's better off everyone casting their vote and whichever candidate wins the majority, wins.
The electoral college is to some extent fair but in contrast there is a point of view where some votes may sway either way. These votes can make the difference between who is elected president. The electoral college is quite fair because it is based on the population and every state has the same amount of representation. On the other hand, it can be very biased and swing states can make a huge impact in upcoming elections. However, the states that are not swing states are known to be a big disadvantage towards people opposing their neighboring citizens views. In all it is a very good system but I believe there could be a more sufficient and fair way of counting votes.
I agree with Daniel on the fact that the population of the state should have more electoral votes because theres a greater difference to look at in the different candidates that the people were voting for. There are more people that you are going to have to control in the greater states as President, so the amount of people should have a factor in the influence.
I also agree with Mr. Dnier, I think that the electoral votes are to some extent fair but I think there are some problems with it. I agree that the states population should have more electoral votes.
I agree with Dnier as well. I agree that this way of counting votes is more organized and can be better than other options. However, I believe that popular votes have more weight. With popular votes, people's votes actually matters. On the other hand, in the electoral this doesn't happens. If you live in a state where it has more democrats than republicans, the republicans' votes won't be considered; therefore, ignoring their votes them and what they want. In a democracy, all votes should be counted. I understand that this electoral vote system works better, but the popular vote counts the people's choice for the president.
I agree with Dnier too. Although the way of electoral college has been used for a long time, there should be a more fair way to count the votes. At the end of an election, the result is always controlled by a few swing states, and it may not reflect the real thoughts of the majority of the voters. Also, those large swing states get more attention from the candidates because the candidates all have the confidence to get the votes from those states that always vote for democrats or republicans. Candidates use their strategies to get more electoral votes and lose the attention on certain states in those process.
I believe That the electorial college is not fair because all of the elctorial votes go to the wht the majority of that state wants. By having the voting done this way, many votes counted in the popular vote dont really matter. VOting would be fair if the president was decided based on popular votes because then the president would acctualll be chosen by the majority. For example, a canidate for president may win the popular vote, but the other canidate may have won the electorial vote and that person will be president. I dont see this ass fair because the majrit of the United States didnt wanted the other canidate as president.
I agree with Arela. i think the electoral votes should be replaced with the majority vote. I think it is more important to take into account every citizens opinion and then make a decision on who the country wants as their president based on that. I think many others would agree with me and I think that until we give the voters a chance to feel like they actually have an impact on the results of who becomes our president they wont be satisfied.
I agree completely with both Arela and Ali on this one. Every single person who voted should expect their vote to count overall within the entire nation and not just within their state. Ali stated it beautifully when talking about giving the people an opportunity to feel as though their voice actually matters and is taken into account.
I do not agree with any of them. I will vouch for the founding fathers. I completely agree with the electoral college. I feel very strongly that the popular vote would not be helpful because most citizens do not have knowledge that is sufficient enough to make a decision so large as who will be president. It should also be kept in mind that the electoral collage and the popular vote very rarely vary.
I agree with various opinions from each Arela, Ali, Arianna, and no_more_xbox's statements. I think that the popular vote really doesn't have much effect on who becomes president, seeing as though the electoral college has the overall say-so. However, I also believe that by voting and rioting and voicing one's opinions, if one does have enough knowledge to back up that opinion than it really could make a difference.
I feel that after recent elections, many have lost faith in the voting system and the structure of the popular and electoral vote, because of the fact that citizens who know little or nothing about the problems, policies, or plans at hand, are voting blindly on either what they've heard in the media or from other people. Therefore, the electoral college, who votes as a profession, is a necessary step our country needs to ensure that a wise candidate is chosen.
I think the electoral college was fair and effective when it was introduced by the founding fathers, but i don't think it's fair anymore. The reason I say this is because currently, there are many states that are known to be either Democrat or Republican. Two examples are California and Texas. If there is a republican voter in California, they don't really impact the election at all because all of the electoral points are going to the democratic candidate anyways. If the side they vote for doesn't win in that state, their voice isn't heard. Every persons voice is heard in a popular vote.
Alejandro, I completely agree with you. The electoral college is fair but in contrast there is a point of view where some votes may say either way. These votes can make the difference between who is elected president. The electoral college is fair because it is based on the population and every state has the same amount of representation. The states that are not swing states are known to be a big disadvantage towards people opposing their neighboring citizens views. The college fair should stay as it is.
I agree with Alo- every person should feel like they have a voice in the election, and the Electoral College completely eliminates that voice. -Dani Devor
I totally agree. The electoral college may be fair when it was first invented but not now because most of the states started to have their own preferences. As a result, the people who hold the different opinions with the opinions of their states are ignored. However, every person's voice should be heard for the election to be fair, so maybe people can find an alternative way for the electoral college.
I disagree, I don't think the electoral college is today or begin with the intent of being fair in terms of structure. Inherent to its name, it was a compromise meaning each gave a little not that it was made in the best interest of the whole--each being small state vs little state. De jure only 27 states have laws that bind electoral votes to reflect that of the popular vote though de facto most electors votes reflect that of the people.
The whole system is confusing and reactionary, people are worried that without the system small states wouldn't have a voice NEWS FLASH, small states INNATELY don't have as strong as a voice because they don't have as many people even with an electoral college population sizes are reflected.
I say popular vote decides the winner... Though it already kind of does.
Except for Al Gore vs Bush and Jackson vs Adams (the first time) and maybe a few others I have yet to research.
I also think the electoral college fair is definetely not fair. Like Aly Paydar said, it is important that every citizen is taken in account. If you only concentrate on the majority of the people voting in each state, a candidate that had less popular votes may win. This can disincourage peoplein states that are obviously on one side of the parties because they will feel that their vote does not count. This is very bad because every citizen should vote and feel that their vote is important. If the US believes that every man is created equal, then they should show this, specially in their voting policies.
I totally agree with Arela and Ali. I find the electoral system not to be fair. Nowadays, citizens have enough knowledge to make responsible and thoughtful decisions. With the electoral system, the only votes that counts are those of the majority, when every citizen's vote should be equally important and counted. Also, with the electoral college, people may feel less motivated to vote.
I agree with Angela, the electoral college is not fair. When the electoral college was first created it made sense to have because the founding fathers didn't want a certain group to have too much power. We are in the 21 century though and the citizens of this country should have the power to choose who they want to represent them as president. The voting should go by majority and not the electoral college.
i agree as well. the electoral college makes some votes count less then others. in california where the democrats win most of the time this makes the republican vote not matter.
I totally agree with Chiara. The electoral college isn't fair at all since only votes of the majority are counted. As US is a democratic country, all individuals' votes should be reflected directly to the result of election.
I completely disagree with Chiara. This system eliminates almost any possible issues with falsification the number of votes, because it is much harder. In order to really falsify the elections and win them, all the elections you need to falsify in higher number of states. For example, in the system where the majority wins, it's much easier, The best example of it, is Putin with 140% of votes in Russia. Furthermore, in the electoral college system, in wing states every vote is really counted and really matters.
2 Pavel: I don't think that the system eliminates almost any possibilities of falsification. Still, the representatives are actually choosing the next president and they can vote as they want, not as the state chose. However, in this system it is easier to recount the votes and at some point it makes it difficult to falsificate the elections.
To be fair its not common place for the electoral college to "change the votes as they want." More often than not the electoral college's votes reflect that of the population, though for 48 states its a win all loose all system, so if lets say (all is possible when hypothetically speaking)Romney won the popular vote in California 6 million to 4 million, he would get all of California's electoral votes (that being 55) and Obama wouldnt get any.
I feel that the electoral college is not fair, because it is a policy of winners takes all. While the winners are more represented than they should, the people who voted for a different party have no representation. It makes me feel like their vote has no importance at all.
I completely agree with Dede. I also believe the electoral college is unfair. I believe that the winner of the presidency should be determined by the popular vote not the electoral college. Every vote of every person should count and have importance in the election.
I agree with Dede and Arielle. the electoral college doesn't really give the people a voice. Even though the president has to win the popular vote as well, the electoral college doesn't let each individual have a voice.
I agree that nowadays it may not be as fair as the founding fathers had envisioned it, but the idea of an educated group of representatives is ideal because many voters are uneducated and vote blindly or vote solely based on appearance. But, misrepresentation can occur because in a strongly decided state, a voter that opposes the majority of his or her say, is virtually purposeless.
The electoral college is not fair at all. It worked during the old times because there were a lot of "1/3rd of a person" if you know what I mean. The college fair should have kept an eye over those who didn't have the whole right to vote. Right now, though, this is not the case anymore. American people are smart enough to choose what they want to choose and not somebody to choose for them.
I think the electoral college is not fair, at all. All votes have a value, so each vote should be counted. I would not be motivated to vote if my vote would have no value. Because of the winner takes all, many votes are not used. I agree with Dede (Brazil) that the people who vote for a different party of the majority have no representation. The winner takes all is also very unfair: the party who wins, wins all votes; even though, the votes are not for them.
I totally agree with Maria. I think that the electoral college makes the vote of the citizen don't count at all. And by feeling ignored, the citizens might not want to vote anymore which would reduce the number of voters and therefore, the expression of the Americans' opinion. Thereby, I strongly believe that the electoral college goes against the principle of democracy.
Well said! I agree with the sentiments of Capucine and Maria.It would be interesting to see how the Republican party reforms itself with the implementation of popular vote because strictly speaking based on numbers of registered democrats and numbers of registered republicans, there are more registered democrats than republicans, though citizens don't always vote with their party.
The electoral college denies the opportunity of vote for people in some states thtat support a certain party, some people don't vote because in ther states, their vote is insignficant. By denying the opportunity of vote, there is no more democracy, the electoral college ended up creating a country based in just two different parties which now, has no more opportunity to experience new types of government policies or ideas other than the Republican's or Democratic's.
I agree with Alexandre. It is a really good point that our government system is limiting us to two defined political parties. Our country should have the opportunity to branch out and accept the ideas of other political parties. The fact that there are only two strong parties is the cause of politicians changing their ideas based on who they are speaking to. For example, when Romney was running in the primaries he acted very conservative but when he was trying to get the vote for president he tried to include ideas from both parties.
I agree and disagree with Alexandre, that the the electoral vote is unfair. It's unfair because electoral vote doesn't always reflect the countries choice of president and doesn't meet the demands of the country. But for the most part the electoral vote and the popular are similar or match up, and does reflect the choice of the country.
I don't feel like the electoral college is fair and the winner should be the winner of the votes that the U.S citizens gave. This just makes everything more complicated and unfair. There should be democracy and the majority should decide their new leader because they deserve this right to at least give their storing opinions about the elections and who they support.
I don't believe the electoral college is fair because while it does usually go with the popular vote of the state, it doesn't necessarily have to. The president should be elected solely on the popular vote because it's in favor of the citizens who make up the vast majority of this country, making all the electoral votes irrelevant because those people are just as much of a citizen as anyone else. No citizen's voice should have a greater impact than any other's, which is what the feel the electoral college tends to give off, making me a supporter of the popular vote.
I do not believe that the electoral college is fair. I think that the electoral college should be dismissed and that the popular vote should determine the winner. In the 2000 Election Al Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the electoral vote narrowly (271) and Bush was named president. This is not a fair nor effective way of electing the president. Every person's vote should be equally important and count but instead the majority wins out.
To be completely honest and blunt here, the electoral college is extremely updated. We aren't in the 19th century anymore. I feel like the electoral college makes American voters feel as if there vote doesn't count-for example, take a Romney voter in Florida. Although they voted for Romney, their state went to Obama. Individual votes count more than anything and if Obama hadn't won the popular vote as well, his moral coming into office wouldn't be as satisfying. -Dani Devor
although functional i believe that the electoral college is a little messed up in the way it puts too much deciding factors into one state. Such as this year it was said how the deciding vote for whether or not romney was still in the race was up to florida. Also For the larger states such as california and texas they are given too many votes in the electoral college that can comletely change the game for the canidates
The electoral system is not fair because the legislative branch is able to devise congressional districts based on populous. This can generate unfair boundaries depending on which ever party is the majority in congress. If there was a voting system similar to the parliamentary method than questionable boundaries would be irrelevant to the outcome.
Electoral College is not fair; the system might have worked a couple centuries ago but not now. The popular vote should be the determinant of who is to be president, it should not lie in the hands of the bigger states. (Florida and California) Getting rid of electoral college, will make people happier with the results. To be specific, if you live in California and are a Republican then your vote really doesnt count for anything because California is majorly Democratic state, but had you been living in a "swing" state your vote could be the deciding factor for who is preident. The system does not work and needs to be changes so that everyones vote counts for the same value. -Olivia Herbert (United States)
I agree with Olivia. The states with the most electoral votes (California, Texas, and Florida) have too much power and influence in determining the president. For example, it is too difficult for a republican candidate to win California. Olivia makes a good argument how republican's votes in California don't count for anything. I strongly agree the system is flawed, especially in the amount of electoral votes California has.
I agree with both Olivia and Vanessa. People are going to realize that their votes aren't being accounted for and it may cause people to not vote at all. The whole point of this nation is that we are able to have a say in something and with the electoral college, we aren't fully being granted that right.
I believe that the electoral college system goes against what a democracy is all about. The popular vote, the vote of the citizens, is the only thing that should count because it gives every American who is able to vote the same amount of power to choose the president.
I think that the electoral college is not fair because it doesn't necessarily respond to the population's vote. The electoral vote goes sometimes against the popular vote what can totally change the election of a president, and provoke anger among the citizens.The citizen vote should be the only determinant of the choice of the president because it would represent what American people really want.
I do believe the electoral college is fair, because it allows each state to vote individually on the behalf of its people. But there are alot of flaws to the electoral college most importantly the fact that it was created almost 2 centuries ago when the U.S. was still just beginning to form a country and needed a way to count for its broad population. Although it is not seen often there are occurrences throughout history of the electoral college votes going toward one major party but the popular vote going towards the other opposing one. And, in cases such as these the electoral college may be viewed upon as an inadequate form for determining a president. But luckily, there have not been too many incidents as such, therefore allowing us to continue with the same statures of government. That is until we fid another that suits our needs better.
I do not think that the electoral college is fair because not every vote by the citizens are counted. Big states are gaining too much influence in the election. For instance, if California, New York and Florida were counted less, the electoral college could have ended in Romney's victory. I personally think that these big states are giving too much influence in the election, making those states key factors in winning. Each vote by the population should be considered only, because this will accurately shows what the entire American citizens are wanting, not only the voices of the big states.
I think that the electoral college is not fair because sometimes a candidate can win with less popular votes if he has more electoral votes. I think this is going against what the citizens want. Electoral college was first used to aid the election system of society, however I believe that now electoral college has no more effect of helping the election system.
I do not believe that the electoral college is fair. I don't think that the votes from the electoral college truly show who the population wants as president. I feel like it decides votes for people based on what state they live in. For example, California is such a democratic state and has so many electoral votes that the votes of the Republicans in California aren't counted. Also, the electoral college can cause problems if one candidate wins the electoral vote and one wins the popular vote. This leaves Americans feeling like they might not have made the right decision and is still undecided. We should just get rid of the electoral college and use the popular vote to determine the president.
I think the electoral college is fair because it gives power to states with very small populations. should the presidential election be based completely on the popular vote, presidential candidates would only travel to states with large populations to campaign and the smaller states with smaller populations would rarely get any action from the candidates because there would be no reason to visit these states. with our current system, smaller states are often swing states and they actually get more campaigning time than larger places like california and texas. every state is now pivotal in deciding their choice for president of the united states. although not as important, the electoral college also prevents uninformed voters from deciding the election because individual voters are less powerful than the electors.
Yeah, but wouldn't you agree that candidates today still put a bigger emphasis on the bigger states than the smaller states? If the electoral college was done away with, then each person's vote would count more no matter the state that they live in, big or small. Also, small states are swing states because the big states are usually decided early on, right? And I strongly think that each person's vote should count rather than a small group deciding on behalf of a state. A candidate shouldn't be able to win an election if he loses the popular vote. It just doesn't seem right.
Like Jake, I disagree with Portia. They would spend time in ALL of the states not just the swing states like they do now! Texas is Republican and that is set just like California is Democratic and that is set. Those are the 2 biggest electoral votes and if it was based on popular vote this would make them spend time in every state, so that a majority of the population is on their side, not just enough of the population to swing the 270 electoral votes that they need.I agree again with Jake, every vote that is cast should count! If a president doesn't win the popular vote and he wins the electoral vote, he really should be ashamed because he is about to step up and be president when in reality over half of the country doesn't want him to be president!
I do not believe the Electoral College is fair. I believe that a candidate should win by acquiring the majority of the popular vote. The Electoral College only raises confusing problems and makes a mess. A candidate should not win if he receives the most votes from the electoral college, yet he loses the popular vote. In cases where the candidate wins both sets of votes then the college is fine, but the results do not always turn out like this. It is an outdated system that needs to be done away with.
The electoral college is not always fair but in times where the total votes for each candidate are close or even tied the electoral college helps whether its fair or not. However in cases where a president is elected because of electoral votes is wrong because it makes more sense for the president with more votes to win the election. The only useful objective of the electoral college is when their is a tie, there is no other logical reason the electoral college should decide whom is the next president.
I don't think the electoral college is fair, because California has 55 electoral votes and is always strongly democratic in every election. Basically, the democratic candidate automatically has California's 55 votes out of the 270 needed to win. I believe California should be split into North and South California on the electoral college, so republicans can have a chance to make their votes count. I also believe that as long as California has that many electoral votes, it gives the democratic party an unfair advantage over the republicans, and it will be much for difficult for a republican candidate to win.
I think the electoral college fulfills the requirements for voting in the United States and eases the process of voting. However, I believe that it takes away the importance of every vote counting. For example, a republican in the state of California basically has no reason to vote because he knows that the 55 votes California gives will go to the democratic candidate. Whereas if every vote counted, he would be more inclined to vote and make a difference. There also is a possibility that a candidate gets more popular votes and still loses the election, which I find completely unfair because the whole point of an election is if the majority of people like their candidate, he will/should win.
Nom I do not think the electoral college is fair. The person with the most votes from the people should win. It is not fair to win CA by one vote and get 55 electoral college points
I think the electoral college is becoming outdated. I think that we should reconsider whether it is really necessary to have something like the electoral college in our country. I think it lessens the value that people feel they have when they submit their vote, and I think it gives people an opportunity to mess with what the people of the states actually want. Although I would hope that no one would do such a thing, I think it would be safer to reconsider the options of the electoral college.
I believe the electoral college is unfair. I think that if our country would count by popular vote, there would be no controversy whatsoever. If the popular vote put their ballads toward one candidate, then that is the candidate who should be chosen for president. I don't understand how you could call popular vote unfair if that's what our country voted for. I believe that making popular vote the determining factor in the president would eliminate any controversy.
I think the electoral college is a flawed system. Before this election took place many predictions said they believed Obama would win the electoral votes but Romney would win the popular vote. This is why it would be unfair. I believe that they candidate with the most votes should win. Yes it would take more time to count them all but it is more fair.
I think the electoral college is unfair because of the flaws that candidates exploit to win the majority vote. Candidates don't focus on states that have small amounts of electoral votes so not only are the individuals votes not being listened to in larger states, but they are even more disregarded in small states due to the candidates belief that they don't need to campaign in states that won't affect the election. I believe it is an outdated system that ignores small states in the US.
I think that the electoral college is not fair. The electoral college was put to use because the government/men creating our governmental system did not think that the white property owning men that were allowed to vote would elect the president that is right for our country. If our country still feels the same way, then we have much bigger problems. The president should be based on the popular vote because he is supposed to be elected by the people. For example: All of those Republicans residing in California think that there was no point in voting because even if they went to vote for Mitt Romney there was no way it would effect the ELECTORAL VOTES. It is simple, each voters vote should count otherwise you're essentially taking away people's voices.
I do not find the electoral college the most affective approach when electing the president. Each individuals vote should count as more than a "guideline" to each state. Most of the time we are fairly certain which state will vote democratic or republican. A great examples is the 2000 election, when Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the electoral vote (barely he had 271). I think that if we changed to popular vote the majority of the time we would have the same victor, but it seems more fair to do it this way.
I do not believe that the electoral college is entirely fair. I believe that the electoral college should be gotten rid of and then replaced with a majority vote through out the United States when voting for a president. A good example of how the electoral college is not fair is the election of 2000 with Bush and Gore running. Bush won the electoral votes, however, Gore won the popular votes. So the majority of the United States wanted Gore to be the president. If the majority of the United states wants to always be heard, we should get rid of the electoral college.
This has been a question that have struggled with for a while. I don't think it is entirely fair because a candidate can win the popular vote yet still lose the election because they lost the the electoral vote. I don't feel that represents "one man, one vote" very well because they can still lose with more votes. By looking at the popular vote, its easy to tell who the american people want for president and it seems cagy to me that the candidate without the most votes can still win.
I dont think that electoral votes are very fair because all the states have different electoral votes. For example, California has 55 electoral votes which is one of the biggest number in US electoral votes. So, presidential candidate tries really hard to get the most electoral votes in certain states that have most electoral votes. It seems biased. I think states all have the same electoral votes. Obama already has a big back up which is California. If he didn't have a California electoral votes, the election would have been different. Thus, I dont think electoral votes are the effective way to approach things.
I don't believe that the electoral college is a fair way of electing our president. It only makes sense that the person with the most votes wins the election. Because of the electoral college, the individual's vote is really not that important. There is really no point in a Republican voting in California or a Democrat to vote in Texas because their state would go in the opposite direction regardless of whether or not they vote. Also I believe that some states have way to many electoral votes. In the example of California and its 55 electoral votes, even if the candidate wins California by 1 vote, they receive all 55 votes and that is enough to completely turn an election. California has around 1/5 of all the electoral votes which is way too many for one state. I think that the individual loses the importance of their vote with the electoral college and it should be removed so that the elected president is the one with the most popular votes.
I dont think that the electoral college is fair. I think it ios an outdated process that doesnt neccasarily connect with what the people want. In modern day society i feel we could have a much more effective process bbut we dont. The electoral college allows for candidates who are sure they are going to win a state to never campaign in that state. I dont think that is fair they should have to campaign in all fifty states as apposed to the few that they are uneasy about winning.
I completely agree with lizzie when she says that the electoral college is outdated. In my opinion in these days, with the technology we have, America should be able to use a popular vote system and count the votes as fast as they would with the state votes.
I agree with both Lizzie and fofa, the popular vote is so much more fair. If the majority of America like someone then they should be president.This is entirely untrue. Most of the countries use the popular vote system. As a symbol of liberty America has to update itself in order to have much more objective results.
I don't think that the electoral college is a fair representation of the people of the United States. The goal of the government should be to help and please as many of its citizens as possible, which is why they should listen to the majority of the popular vote, not the vote of each state. The electoral college also puts too much focus on "battleground states" because candidates can basically rely on states like California and Texas as sure-win states, and skimp on campaigning there. That being said, the electoral college has gone the way of the popular vote almost every election, and the few elections where it failed to do so, the losing candidate only won the popular vote by a very slim margin. The electoral college isn't the most fair system available, but it hasn't caused any major debacles yet, which is why I think the electoral college will be around for the foreseeable future.
The Electoral College is not a fair way to deliver the elections of a DEMOCRATIC country. Even if the illiterate or similar would deliver a foul vote, the popular vote will not "blank" anybody's vote, fail or educated. For example the people in California, US are most likely to have a result that everybody knows without even voting; the minorities in that case would not have a decision that affects the nation's vote. Instead a voter from California's minorities on a real democratic National vote would have significance in the overall result of the elections.
I'm two sided on this one. Yes, I believe in some instances that the electoral college can be a fair way to individual show each states loyalty to Rep. or Dem. But, I also can see how it is unfair. You see, the electoral college can extremely shift the votes by winning a few key states (ex; California, Florida, Texas). I believe that some of the states with a large number of electoral votes should be divided more equally. It's not fair for Republicans who live in California do always assume that they are going to loose because of the majority of the state is Democrat. This past election, 6 million people voted for Barack Obama is California. How many do you think voted for Romney? 4 million. So yes I believe it's a great tool for future election as it shows a states loyalty but I also believe it's unfair for some states that have a huge number of electoral votes because it gives one party an advantage. In theory, I think having it be decided by popular vote is a fairer way to elect a president.
ReplyDeleteI agree with John's idea of having the elections decided by popular vote because in electoral college, the individual looses his power to vote. A democrat who lives in a republican country will throw away his vote if given to the other side. Like this case, millions of votes will not be considered, plus, practically only the states that do not have a majority will decide the outcome of the elections.
DeleteI agree with John when he said ,"I also believe it's unfair for some states that have a huge number of electoral votes because it gives one party an advantage. In theory, I think having it be decided by popular vote is a fairer way to elect a president." I believe it is unfair that there is a possibility that the president can win without the population's approval meaning the president can only win with electoral votes and not with popularity votes. I think it's better off everyone casting their vote and whichever candidate wins the majority, wins.
DeleteThe electoral college is to some extent fair but in contrast there is a point of view where some votes may sway either way. These votes can make the difference between who is elected president. The electoral college is quite fair because it is based on the population and every state has the same amount of representation. On the other hand, it can be very biased and swing states can make a huge impact in upcoming elections. However, the states that are not swing states are known to be a big disadvantage towards people opposing their neighboring citizens views. In all it is a very good system but I believe there could be a more sufficient and fair way of counting votes.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daniel on the fact that the population of the state should have more electoral votes because theres a greater difference to look at in the different candidates that the people were voting for. There are more people that you are going to have to control in the greater states as President, so the amount of people should have a factor in the influence.
DeleteI also agree with Mr. Dnier, I think that the electoral votes are to some extent fair but I think there are some problems with it. I agree that the states population should have more electoral votes.
DeleteI agree with Dnier as well. I agree that this way of counting votes is more organized and can be better than other options. However, I believe that popular votes have more weight. With popular votes, people's votes actually matters. On the other hand, in the electoral this doesn't happens. If you live in a state where it has more democrats than republicans, the republicans' votes won't be considered; therefore, ignoring their votes them and what they want. In a democracy, all votes should be counted. I understand that this electoral vote system works better, but the popular vote counts the people's choice for the president.
DeleteI agree with Dnier too. Although the way of electoral college has been used for a long time, there should be a more fair way to count the votes. At the end of an election, the result is always controlled by a few swing states, and it may not reflect the real thoughts of the majority of the voters. Also, those large swing states get more attention from the candidates because the candidates all have the confidence to get the votes from those states that always vote for democrats or republicans. Candidates use their strategies to get more electoral votes and lose the attention on certain states in those process.
DeleteI believe That the electorial college is not fair because all of the elctorial votes go to the wht the majority of that state wants. By having the voting done this way, many votes counted in the popular vote dont really matter. VOting would be fair if the president was decided based on popular votes because then the president would acctualll be chosen by the majority. For example, a canidate for president may win the popular vote, but the other canidate may have won the electorial vote and that person will be president. I dont see this ass fair because the majrit of the United States didnt wanted the other canidate as president.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Arela. i think the electoral votes should be replaced with the majority vote. I think it is more important to take into account every citizens opinion and then make a decision on who the country wants as their president based on that. I think many others would agree with me and I think that until we give the voters a chance to feel like they actually have an impact on the results of who becomes our president they wont be satisfied.
DeleteI agree completely with both Arela and Ali on this one. Every single person who voted should expect their vote to count overall within the entire nation and not just within their state. Ali stated it beautifully when talking about giving the people an opportunity to feel as though their voice actually matters and is taken into account.
DeleteI do not agree with any of them. I will vouch for the founding fathers. I completely agree with the electoral college. I feel very strongly that the popular vote would not be helpful because most citizens do not have knowledge that is sufficient enough to make a decision so large as who will be president. It should also be kept in mind that the electoral collage and the popular vote very rarely vary.
DeleteI agree with various opinions from each Arela, Ali, Arianna, and no_more_xbox's statements. I think that the popular vote really doesn't have much effect on who becomes president, seeing as though the electoral college has the overall say-so. However, I also believe that by voting and rioting and voicing one's opinions, if one does have enough knowledge to back up that opinion than it really could make a difference.
DeleteI feel that after recent elections, many have lost faith in the voting system and the structure of the popular and electoral vote, because of the fact that citizens who know little or nothing about the problems, policies, or plans at hand, are voting blindly on either what they've heard in the media or from other people. Therefore, the electoral college, who votes as a profession, is a necessary step our country needs to ensure that a wise candidate is chosen.
I think the electoral college was fair and effective when it was introduced by the founding fathers, but i don't think it's fair anymore. The reason I say this is because currently, there are many states that are known to be either Democrat or Republican. Two examples are California and Texas. If there is a republican voter in California, they don't really impact the election at all because all of the electoral points are going to the democratic candidate anyways. If the side they vote for doesn't win in that state, their voice isn't heard. Every persons voice is heard in a popular vote.
ReplyDeleteAlejandro,
DeleteI completely agree with you. The electoral college is fair but in contrast there is a point of view where some votes may say either way. These votes can make the difference between who is elected president. The electoral college is fair because it is based on the population and every state has the same amount of representation. The states that are not swing states are known to be a big disadvantage towards people opposing their neighboring citizens views. The college fair should stay as it is.
I agree with Alo- every person should feel like they have a voice in the election, and the Electoral College completely eliminates that voice.
Delete-Dani Devor
I totally agree. The electoral college may be fair when it was first invented but not now because most of the states started to have their own preferences. As a result, the people who hold the different opinions with the opinions of their states are ignored. However, every person's voice should be heard for the election to be fair, so maybe people can find an alternative way for the electoral college.
DeleteI disagree, I don't think the electoral college is today or begin with the intent of being fair in terms of structure. Inherent to its name, it was a compromise meaning each gave a little not that it was made in the best interest of the whole--each being small state vs little state. De jure only 27 states have laws that bind electoral votes to reflect that of the popular vote though de facto most electors votes reflect that of the people.
DeleteThe whole system is confusing and reactionary, people are worried that without the system small states wouldn't have a voice NEWS FLASH, small states INNATELY don't have as strong as a voice because they don't have as many people even with an electoral college population sizes are reflected.
I say popular vote decides the winner... Though it already kind of does.
Except for Al Gore vs Bush and Jackson vs Adams (the first time) and maybe a few others I have yet to research.
But you know... I might be called a socialist.
I also think the electoral college fair is definetely not fair. Like Aly Paydar said, it is important that every citizen is taken in account. If you only concentrate on the majority of the people voting in each state, a candidate that had less popular votes may win. This can disincourage peoplein states that are obviously on one side of the parties because they will feel that their vote does not count. This is very bad because every citizen should vote and feel that their vote is important. If the US believes that every man is created equal, then they should show this, specially in their voting policies.
ReplyDeleteAngela (Italy)
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with Arela and Ali. I find the electoral system not to be fair. Nowadays, citizens have enough knowledge to make responsible and thoughtful decisions. With the electoral system, the only votes that counts are those of the majority, when every citizen's vote should be equally important and counted. Also, with the electoral college, people may feel less motivated to vote.
I agree with Angela, the electoral college is not fair. When the electoral college was first created it made sense to have because the founding fathers didn't want a certain group to have too much power. We are in the 21 century though and the citizens of this country should have the power to choose who they want to represent them as president. The voting should go by majority and not the electoral college.
Deletei agree as well. the electoral college makes some votes count less then others. in california where the democrats win most of the time this makes the republican vote not matter.
Deletethe electoral college isn't fair. it should be the majority of votes to win, instead the electoral college can change the votes as they want.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with Chiara. The electoral college isn't fair at all since only votes of the majority are counted. As US is a democratic country, all individuals' votes should be reflected directly to the result of election.
DeleteI completely disagree with Chiara. This system eliminates almost any possible issues with falsification the number of votes, because it is much harder. In order to really falsify the elections and win them, all the elections you need to falsify in higher number of states. For example, in the system where the majority wins, it's much easier, The best example of it, is Putin with 140% of votes in Russia. Furthermore, in the electoral college system, in wing states every vote is really counted and really matters.
DeleteOmg, can you stop talking about these 140%? You make me sad.
Delete2 Pavel: I don't think that the system eliminates almost any possibilities of falsification. Still, the representatives are actually choosing the next president and they can vote as they want, not as the state chose. However, in this system it is easier to recount the votes and at some point it makes it difficult to falsificate the elections.
DeleteTo be fair its not common place for the electoral college to "change the votes as they want." More often than not the electoral college's votes reflect that of the population, though for 48 states its a win all loose all system, so if lets say (all is possible when hypothetically speaking)Romney won the popular vote in California 6 million to 4 million, he would get all of California's electoral votes (that being 55) and Obama wouldnt get any.
DeleteI feel that the electoral college is not fair, because it is a policy of winners takes all. While the winners are more represented than they should, the people who voted for a different party have no representation. It makes me feel like their vote has no importance at all.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Dede. I also believe the electoral college is unfair. I believe that the winner of the presidency should be determined by the popular vote not the electoral college. Every vote of every person should count and have importance in the election.
DeleteI agree with Dede and Arielle. the electoral college doesn't really give the people a voice. Even though the president has to win the popular vote as well, the electoral college doesn't let each individual have a voice.
DeleteI agree that nowadays it may not be as fair as the founding fathers had envisioned it, but the idea of an educated group of representatives is ideal because many voters are uneducated and vote blindly or vote solely based on appearance. But, misrepresentation can occur because in a strongly decided state, a voter that opposes the majority of his or her say, is virtually purposeless.
DeleteThe electoral college is not fair at all. It worked during the old times because there were a lot of "1/3rd of a person" if you know what I mean. The college fair should have kept an eye over those who didn't have the whole right to vote. Right now, though, this is not the case anymore. American people are smart enough to choose what they want to choose and not somebody to choose for them.
ReplyDeleteI think the electoral college is not fair, at all. All votes have a value, so each vote should be counted. I would not be motivated to vote if my vote would have no value. Because of the winner takes all, many votes are not used. I agree with Dede (Brazil) that the people who vote for a different party of the majority have no representation. The winner takes all is also very unfair: the party who wins, wins all votes; even though, the votes are not for them.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with Maria. I think that the electoral college makes the vote of the citizen don't count at all. And by feeling ignored, the citizens might not want to vote anymore which would reduce the number of voters and therefore, the expression of the Americans' opinion. Thereby, I strongly believe that the electoral college goes against the principle of democracy.
Delete-Capucine Tuffier
Well said! I agree with the sentiments of Capucine and Maria.It would be interesting to see how the Republican party reforms itself with the implementation of popular vote because strictly speaking based on numbers of registered democrats and numbers of registered republicans, there are more registered democrats than republicans, though citizens don't always vote with their party.
DeleteThe electoral college denies the opportunity of vote for people in some states thtat support a certain party, some people don't vote because in ther states, their vote is insignficant. By denying the opportunity of vote, there is no more democracy, the electoral college ended up creating a country based in just two different parties which now, has no more opportunity to experience new types of government policies or ideas other than the Republican's or Democratic's.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alexandre. It is a really good point that our government system is limiting us to two defined political parties. Our country should have the opportunity to branch out and accept the ideas of other political parties. The fact that there are only two strong parties is the cause of politicians changing their ideas based on who they are speaking to. For example, when Romney was running in the primaries he acted very conservative but when he was trying to get the vote for president he tried to include ideas from both parties.
DeleteI agree and disagree with Alexandre, that the the electoral vote is unfair. It's unfair because electoral vote doesn't always reflect the countries choice of president and doesn't meet the demands of the country. But for the most part the electoral vote and the popular are similar or match up, and does reflect the choice of the country.
DeleteI don't feel like the electoral college is fair and the winner should be the winner of the votes that the U.S citizens gave.
ReplyDeleteThis just makes everything more complicated and unfair. There should be democracy and the majority should decide their new leader because they deserve this right to at least give their storing opinions about the elections and who they support.
I don't believe the electoral college is fair because while it does usually go with the popular vote of the state, it doesn't necessarily have to. The president should be elected solely on the popular vote because it's in favor of the citizens who make up the vast majority of this country, making all the electoral votes irrelevant because those people are just as much of a citizen as anyone else. No citizen's voice should have a greater impact than any other's, which is what the feel the electoral college tends to give off, making me a supporter of the popular vote.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that the electoral college is fair. I think that the electoral college should be dismissed and that the popular vote should determine the winner. In the 2000 Election Al Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the electoral vote narrowly (271) and Bush was named president. This is not a fair nor effective way of electing the president. Every person's vote should be equally important and count but instead the majority wins out.
ReplyDeleteTo be completely honest and blunt here, the electoral college is extremely updated. We aren't in the 19th century anymore. I feel like the electoral college makes American voters feel as if there vote doesn't count-for example, take a Romney voter in Florida. Although they voted for Romney, their state went to Obama. Individual votes count more than anything and if Obama hadn't won the popular vote as well, his moral coming into office wouldn't be as satisfying.
ReplyDelete-Dani Devor
although functional i believe that the electoral college is a little messed up in the way it puts too much deciding factors into one state. Such as this year it was said how the deciding vote for whether or not romney was still in the race was up to florida. Also For the larger states such as california and texas they are given too many votes in the electoral college that can comletely change the game for the canidates
ReplyDeleteThe electoral system is not fair because the legislative branch is able to devise congressional districts based on populous. This can generate unfair boundaries depending on which ever party is the majority in congress. If there was a voting system similar to the parliamentary method than questionable boundaries would be irrelevant to the outcome.
ReplyDeleteElectoral College is not fair; the system might have worked a couple centuries ago but not now. The popular vote should be the determinant of who is to be president, it should not lie in the hands of the bigger states. (Florida and California) Getting rid of electoral college, will make people happier with the results. To be specific, if you live in California and are a Republican then your vote really doesnt count for anything because California is majorly Democratic state, but had you been living in a "swing" state your vote could be the deciding factor for who is preident. The system does not work and needs to be changes so that everyones vote counts for the same value.
ReplyDelete-Olivia Herbert (United States)
I agree with Olivia. The states with the most electoral votes (California, Texas, and Florida) have too much power and influence in determining the president. For example, it is too difficult for a republican candidate to win California. Olivia makes a good argument how republican's votes in California don't count for anything. I strongly agree the system is flawed, especially in the amount of electoral votes California has.
DeleteI agree with both Olivia and Vanessa. People are going to realize that their votes aren't being accounted for and it may cause people to not vote at all. The whole point of this nation is that we are able to have a say in something and with the electoral college, we aren't fully being granted that right.
DeleteI believe that the electoral college system goes against what a democracy is all about. The popular vote, the vote of the citizens, is the only thing that should count because it gives every American who is able to vote the same amount of power to choose the president.
ReplyDeleteI think that the electoral college is not fair because it doesn't necessarily respond to the population's vote. The electoral vote goes sometimes against the popular vote what can totally change the election of a president, and provoke anger among the citizens.The citizen vote should be the only determinant of the choice of the president because it would represent what American people really want.
ReplyDeleteCapucine Tuffier
I do believe the electoral college is fair, because it allows each state to vote individually on the behalf of its people. But there are alot of flaws to the electoral college most importantly the fact that it was created almost 2 centuries ago when the U.S. was still just beginning to form a country and needed a way to count for its broad population. Although it is not seen often there are occurrences throughout history of the electoral college votes going toward one major party but the popular vote going towards the other opposing one. And, in cases such as these the electoral college may be viewed upon as an inadequate form for determining a president. But luckily, there have not been too many incidents as such, therefore allowing us to continue with the same statures of government. That is until we fid another that suits our needs better.
ReplyDeleteI do not think that the electoral college is fair because not every vote by the citizens are counted. Big states are gaining too much influence in the election. For instance, if California, New York and Florida were counted less, the electoral college could have ended in Romney's victory. I personally think that these big states are giving too much influence in the election, making those states key factors in winning. Each vote by the population should be considered only, because this will accurately shows what the entire American citizens are wanting, not only the voices of the big states.
ReplyDeleteI think that the electoral college is not fair because sometimes a candidate can win with less popular votes if he has more electoral votes. I think this is going against what the citizens want. Electoral college was first used to aid the election system of society, however I believe that now electoral college has no more effect of helping the election system.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI do not believe that the electoral college is fair. I don't think that the votes from the electoral college truly show who the population wants as president. I feel like it decides votes for people based on what state they live in. For example, California is such a democratic state and has so many electoral votes that the votes of the Republicans in California aren't counted. Also, the electoral college can cause problems if one candidate wins the electoral vote and one wins the popular vote. This leaves Americans feeling like they might not have made the right decision and is still undecided. We should just get rid of the electoral college and use the popular vote to determine the president.
ReplyDeleteI think the electoral college is fair because it gives power to states with very small populations. should the presidential election be based completely on the popular vote, presidential candidates would only travel to states with large populations to campaign and the smaller states with smaller populations would rarely get any action from the candidates because there would be no reason to visit these states. with our current system, smaller states are often swing states and they actually get more campaigning time than larger places like california and texas. every state is now pivotal in deciding their choice for president of the united states. although not as important, the electoral college also prevents uninformed voters from deciding the election because individual voters are less powerful than the electors.
ReplyDeleteYeah, but wouldn't you agree that candidates today still put a bigger emphasis on the bigger states than the smaller states? If the electoral college was done away with, then each person's vote would count more no matter the state that they live in, big or small. Also, small states are swing states because the big states are usually decided early on, right? And I strongly think that each person's vote should count rather than a small group deciding on behalf of a state. A candidate shouldn't be able to win an election if he loses the popular vote. It just doesn't seem right.
DeleteLike Jake, I disagree with Portia. They would spend time in ALL of the states not just the swing states like they do now! Texas is Republican and that is set just like California is Democratic and that is set. Those are the 2 biggest electoral votes and if it was based on popular vote this would make them spend time in every state, so that a majority of the population is on their side, not just enough of the population to swing the 270 electoral votes that they need.I agree again with Jake, every vote that is cast should count! If a president doesn't win the popular vote and he wins the electoral vote, he really should be ashamed because he is about to step up and be president when in reality over half of the country doesn't want him to be president!
Deletei agree with you entirely the system is out of date and needs to be rethought.
DeleteI do not believe the Electoral College is fair. I believe that a candidate should win by acquiring the majority of the popular vote. The Electoral College only raises confusing problems and makes a mess. A candidate should not win if he receives the most votes from the electoral college, yet he loses the popular vote. In cases where the candidate wins both sets of votes then the college is fine, but the results do not always turn out like this. It is an outdated system that needs to be done away with.
ReplyDeleteThe electoral college is not always fair but in times where the total votes for each candidate are close or even tied the electoral college helps whether its fair or not. However in cases where a president is elected because of electoral votes is wrong because it makes more sense for the president with more votes to win the election. The only useful objective of the electoral college is when their is a tie, there is no other logical reason the electoral college should decide whom is the next president.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the electoral college is fair, because California has 55 electoral votes and is always strongly democratic in every election. Basically, the democratic candidate automatically has California's 55 votes out of the 270 needed to win. I believe California should be split into North and South California on the electoral college, so republicans can have a chance to make their votes count. I also believe that as long as California has that many electoral votes, it gives the democratic party an unfair advantage over the republicans, and it will be much for difficult for a republican candidate to win.
ReplyDeleteI think the electoral college fulfills the requirements for voting in the United States and eases the process of voting. However, I believe that it takes away the importance of every vote counting. For example, a republican in the state of California basically has no reason to vote because he knows that the 55 votes California gives will go to the democratic candidate. Whereas if every vote counted, he would be more inclined to vote and make a difference. There also is a possibility that a candidate gets more popular votes and still loses the election, which I find completely unfair because the whole point of an election is if the majority of people like their candidate, he will/should win.
ReplyDeleteNom I do not think the electoral college is fair. The person with the most votes from the people should win. It is not fair to win CA by one vote and get 55 electoral college points
ReplyDeleteI think the electoral college is becoming outdated. I think that we should reconsider whether it is really necessary to have something like the electoral college in our country. I think it lessens the value that people feel they have when they submit their vote, and I think it gives people an opportunity to mess with what the people of the states actually want. Although I would hope that no one would do such a thing, I think it would be safer to reconsider the options of the electoral college.
ReplyDeleteI believe the electoral college is unfair. I think that if our country would count by popular vote, there would be no controversy whatsoever. If the popular vote put their ballads toward one candidate, then that is the candidate who should be chosen for president. I don't understand how you could call popular vote unfair if that's what our country voted for. I believe that making popular vote the determining factor in the president would eliminate any controversy.
ReplyDeleteI think the electoral college is a flawed system. Before this election took place many predictions said they believed Obama would win the electoral votes but Romney would win the popular vote. This is why it would be unfair. I believe that they candidate with the most votes should win. Yes it would take more time to count them all but it is more fair.
ReplyDeleteI think the electoral college is unfair because of the flaws that candidates exploit to win the majority vote. Candidates don't focus on states that have small amounts of electoral votes so not only are the individuals votes not being listened to in larger states, but they are even more disregarded in small states due to the candidates belief that they don't need to campaign in states that won't affect the election. I believe it is an outdated system that ignores small states in the US.
ReplyDeleteI think that the electoral college is not fair. The electoral college was put to use because the government/men creating our governmental system did not think that the white property owning men that were allowed to vote would elect the president that is right for our country. If our country still feels the same way, then we have much bigger problems. The president should be based on the popular vote because he is supposed to be elected by the people. For example: All of those Republicans residing in California think that there was no point in voting because even if they went to vote for Mitt Romney there was no way it would effect the ELECTORAL VOTES. It is simple, each voters vote should count otherwise you're essentially taking away people's voices.
ReplyDeleteI do not find the electoral college the most affective approach when electing the president. Each individuals vote should count as more than a "guideline" to each state. Most of the time we are fairly certain which state will vote democratic or republican. A great examples is the 2000 election, when Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the electoral vote (barely he had 271). I think that if we changed to popular vote the majority of the time we would have the same victor, but it seems more fair to do it this way.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that the electoral college is entirely fair. I believe that the electoral college should be gotten rid of and then replaced with a majority vote through out the United States when voting for a president. A good example of how the electoral college is not fair is the election of 2000 with Bush and Gore running. Bush won the electoral votes, however, Gore won the popular votes. So the majority of the United States wanted Gore to be the president. If the majority of the United states wants to always be heard, we should get rid of the electoral college.
ReplyDeleteThis has been a question that have struggled with for a while. I don't think it is entirely fair because a candidate can win the popular vote yet still lose the election because they lost the the electoral vote. I don't feel that represents "one man, one vote" very well because they can still lose with more votes. By looking at the popular vote, its easy to tell who the american people want for president and it seems cagy to me that the candidate without the most votes can still win.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that electoral votes are very fair because all the states have different electoral votes. For example, California has 55 electoral votes which is one of the biggest number in US electoral votes. So, presidential candidate tries really hard to get the most electoral votes in certain states that have most electoral votes. It seems biased. I think states all have the same electoral votes. Obama already has a big back up which is California. If he didn't have a California electoral votes, the election would have been different. Thus, I dont think electoral votes are the effective way to approach things.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that the electoral college is a fair way of electing our president. It only makes sense that the person with the most votes wins the election. Because of the electoral college, the individual's vote is really not that important. There is really no point in a Republican voting in California or a Democrat to vote in Texas because their state would go in the opposite direction regardless of whether or not they vote. Also I believe that some states have way to many electoral votes. In the example of California and its 55 electoral votes, even if the candidate wins California by 1 vote, they receive all 55 votes and that is enough to completely turn an election. California has around 1/5 of all the electoral votes which is way too many for one state. I think that the individual loses the importance of their vote with the electoral college and it should be removed so that the elected president is the one with the most popular votes.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that the electoral college is fair. I think it ios an outdated process that doesnt neccasarily connect with what the people want. In modern day society i feel we could have a much more effective process bbut we dont. The electoral college allows for candidates who are sure they are going to win a state to never campaign in that state. I dont think that is fair they should have to campaign in all fifty states as apposed to the few that they are uneasy about winning.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with lizzie when she says that the electoral college is outdated. In my opinion in these days, with the technology we have, America should be able to use a popular vote system and count the votes as fast as they would with the state votes.
DeleteI agree with both Lizzie and fofa, the popular vote is so much more fair. If the majority of America like someone then they should be president.This is entirely untrue. Most of the countries use the popular vote system. As a symbol of liberty America has to update itself in order to have much more objective results.
DeleteI don't think that the electoral college is a fair representation of the people of the United States. The goal of the government should be to help and please as many of its citizens as possible, which is why they should listen to the majority of the popular vote, not the vote of each state. The electoral college also puts too much focus on "battleground states" because candidates can basically rely on states like California and Texas as sure-win states, and skimp on campaigning there. That being said, the electoral college has gone the way of the popular vote almost every election, and the few elections where it failed to do so, the losing candidate only won the popular vote by a very slim margin. The electoral college isn't the most fair system available, but it hasn't caused any major debacles yet, which is why I think the electoral college will be around for the foreseeable future.
ReplyDeleteGuillermo Willson (Venezuela)
ReplyDeleteThe Electoral College is not a fair way to deliver the elections of a DEMOCRATIC country. Even if the illiterate or similar would deliver a foul vote, the popular vote will not "blank" anybody's vote, fail or educated. For example the people in California, US are most likely to have a result that everybody knows without even voting; the minorities in that case would not have a decision that affects the nation's vote. Instead a voter from California's minorities on a real democratic National vote would have significance in the overall result of the elections.
I agree. But on the other hand, wouldn't you like to have a president chosen by a educated voters?
Delete