Electoral vs. Popular Vote

The electoral college was affective when the communications throughout the nation were ineffective to get information across the country. In most instances though, the popular vote reflects the electoral college's decision. Why should I believe that my vote counts in these instances when a selected group of people actually make a monumental national decision like a presidential election? To answer the question, it should be removed, not because the system is bad, but because its so easy to voice an opinion or a vote from Hawaii to DC. But in contrast, it does make known the question, why should the people's vote count when the number 1 write in ballet is Mickey Mouse?

The electoral college is one factor that has handed over the US Federal government to the corporatocrats and dynasties.

It distorts the popular will by making it possible for the most popular candidate to lose. This would seem to the the very anti-thesis of democracy. It's the winner-takes-all system that leads to it, and the possibilities of reforming that are restricted by the fact that it's in the province of state and not Federal powers.

The Longley and Pierce book in 2000 revealed that the electoral college was not intended to be a permanent part of the electoral system.

One can not but conclude that it should be abolished since the prospects of reform are bleak.

The electoral college distorts the true consensus opinion of the US populous. In this manner we defeat the true aims of a democratic society.

Strength of state is already determined by the number of Congressman allowed according to population, so the electoral college to determine the office of President is not needed to balance state power in the federal government.

The U.S. is a federation of states. In addition to their right to be represented, each state has control of how Electors are selected and how their votes get cast. Dropping the Electoral College takes that control away from the states, which undermines the very foundation of this country.

The problem with the Electoral system today, is that a state's electoral votes are usually all given to the popular winner. This means that if a candidate gets just over half of the popular vote in California, all 55 of their electoral votes go to the victor. That's what creates the situation where a President elect does not win the popular vote on a national scale. If we want to fix this, we should fix it at the state level. Nebraska and Maine both distribute their electoral votes based on the winner per congressional district. That better represents the popular vote.

This is a tough issue...I think I'll defer to President Gore.

No. We wouldn't want the presidential race to be a popularity contest, now would we?

While the original reasons behind the electoral college system may not be as prevalent as they once were, dropping the electoral college system would likely only further exacerbate election contention. In most cases, the elector system gives a clear national answer in an election, whereas a popular vote may not be as clear. This may cause more debate over election results. Additionally, electoral votes could potentially be a safeguard against electronic vote tampering. Furthermore, the elector system gives the states themselves more control over the election, by not only having designated people to represent just that one state, but the states have some control over how electors are decided and what say the people of the state have in the electors. By taking away this system, national elections could lose state controls and are more open to tampering or persuasion.

First, we need to change the fact that, due to monetary support, voting really only comes down to Democratic or Republican yet neither seems to be able to provide an honest candidate.

Keep the present system. Once every US citizen has read and understood the Constitution, please rerun this question.

Yes! The electoral college was implemented because the average American did not know enough information to vote when news spread so slowly around the country. In today's age, it makes no sense NOT to have a popular vote. Look at the last elections where the popular vote was different than the electoral vote. That to me is a severe problem that needs to be accounted for.

The Electoral College system should be eliminated because it makes no sense in today's America. The college was intended to protect the new government from democratic pressures. Founders feared at the time that the "majorioty rule" could be just as despotic as that of a king or dictator. Founders also wanted a select group of people who were more knowlegeable than the common public to elect president. Such thinking may have been necessary at that time to build the nation, but no longer needed today. Today's America loves to vote and Americans expect our votes to count. We, Americans, love the popular vote so much so that we encourage other countries to follow suit. It's time to unleash democracy.

America is not a democracy, and most of the changes that have made it so have, in my opinion, harmed the country.

The country is (or at least was) a republic, and I saw we go back to our roots. Keep the college.

The electoral college was one of a few systems put in place to balance the power of regions. While it means that a vote in California is "worth less" than a vote in Iowa and can mean that the winner of the popular vote does not win the Presidency, that's what it was designed to do. The US is an enormous country with a number of powers reserved for the individual states within it. If Presidents were elected by direct popular vote, the most populous states would always get their way; the voice of less populous states would be muted.
The abolition of the electoral college would mean we'd need to take a long, hard look at the makeup of both Houses of Congress and our entire system of government, which is not compatible with a popular vote for the only nationwide elected office.
Keep it.

I oppose any mucking with the system.

Each time we have amended the dead old white guys work we have stepped in soft smelly stuff. Income tax? Runaway government growth. Prohibition? Oppressive invasion of our lives. Direct election of senators? Unfunded mandates.

Popular elections are the too of the devil. The politicians get the mob all worked up and then "solve" our problems. If those "solutions" don't work, they have more "solutions". We're being "solved" into slavery, stupidity, and poverty.

Is this the United STATES of America? Or is it the USA?

My own preference would be for more indirect representation. If anything, the dead old white guys allowed the mob too much sway. We probably should only vote for our mayor and then have him vote for everything above us.

At least then we'd know who to blame!

Yes. The united states should eliminate the electoral college simply because it will eliminate another GW Bush from getting elected a la 2000.

No.

The Electoral College gives a strong incentive for each candidate to concentrate on the political center, as the winner is often determined by the "battleground states" that are almost always "purple."

If the Electoral College was removed, election strategies would change from trying to convert the moderates, independents and the undecided, to attempting to energize the bases to rally more voters than the opposition. Instead of candidates campaigning to the center in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, candidates would campaign to the extremes in Massachusetts and Texas.

The Electoral College is also a protection against election fraud since the outcomes of polls in states like Texas and Massachusetts are almost certain, and thus fraud would be of no use or very overt. The Electoral College allows us to narrow our monitoring to the battleground states where the outcome is far from certain and fraud far more effective.

While the average American is about as qualified to decide who will best serve the country as the candidates are qualified to run it, since the American people do not participate in local or state government, the Electoral College divests America of democracy.

It's not my call to make. Do you like democracy?

The Electoral College is one of the worst aspects of our current government. It's a system that's counter to democracy. It's a system that gives certain Americans' votes more importance than others. It's a system that throws hundreds of thousands of votes away every four years. It's a system that directly contributes to the continuation of our two-party political system. It's a system that makes it possible for a candidate who receives fewer votes than his opponent to win. It's a system that kills voter turnout. It's downright stupid.

If not by popular vote, then run our elections by some other system than the Electoral College. It's an unabashedly stupid, atrociously dated system, and needs to be destroyed.

Under the electoral college process many issues are localized that could quickly become unmanageable with a change in the process. One would be voter turnout and GOTV campaigns where a state or states who have other important elections taking place [or the too frequent ballot initiatives designed for controversy and turnout] can alter balance of 'power' across the country and have undeserved influence on the results. Other voting irregularities - from machine problems and hanging chads to recounts in close outcomes - are also kept isolated to manageable scales in our current system.

Moving to a popular vote would also require a good deal more nationalization of rules for voting (from eligibility to early voting) that after seeing how some states have handled the Help America Vote Act I'm not sure we're ready for.

No. A dictatorship of the large cities doesn't sound too enticing.

The electoral college was created because the founders did not trust the American people to directly elect the President. Now if we did not have a system of pledged electors in every state this would be a question of some interest, but that's not the case.

What we have right now is the direct election of the President.... but with a numerical wildcard thrown in in the form of the College.

And it's stupid.

If we trust the people to elect the executive than we ought do away with the outdated and contrived obstructions to that system.

We're no longer really voting for electors any more. Why involve them at all?

No, they shouldn't.

Without the Electoral College, a candidate could become President by limiting his/her campaigning to California and the DC to Boston corridor. And while that would probably lead to mainly Presidents from the Democratic party, which would be fine with me, that would hardly create a government representative of the entire country.

And for people who think that a Democracy means that the majority vote should win, it doesn't. Democracy isn't supposed to be 'mob rule'. Democracy in the US means that everyone has a say.

Electoral: the Electoral College system is designed to work in a rational series of defaults: if, in the first instance, a candidate receives a substantial majority of the popular vote, then that candidate is virtually certain to win enough electoral votes to be elected president; in the event that the popular vote is extremely close, then the election defaults to that candidate with the best distribution of popular votes (as evidenced by obtaining the absolute majority of electoral votes); in the event the country is so divided that no one obtains an absolute majority of electoral votes, then the choice of president defaults to the States in the U.S. House of Representatives. One way or another, then, the winning candidate must demonstrate both a sufficient popular support to govern as well as a sufficient distribution of that support to govern.

The problem with the Electoral College is that it is outdated. It is simply unfair for all the votes of 1 state going to one candidate over another (i.e. 51%/49%).

Even worse is when the entire presidential elections come down to 1 state. Then, no longer do Americans have a voice, but their state.

Years after years, liberal votes in Texas are completely being disregarded because the majority of the state is conservative. Vice-Versa happens in California.

Now is not this a little ridiculous? According to these current laws, Americans could simply relocate and jinx future elections! Gather a bunch of people to move to Texas, live there, and boom it becomes a blue state?

The way to hold elections, is via the Popular Vote. As such, every American's voice is being heard.

I believe more and more candidates will use it to hold live webcasts, and live "townhall" forums.

Elimination of the electoral college isn't necessary in order to affect change - proportional distribution of each state's electoral votes based on the popular vote within that state would do the trick as far as I can tell.