What is your opinion on the Electoral College?
1. A 2. A 3. A 4. Those who oppose the electoral are the ones losing due to it. Should the situation change, they would be in support of it. Keep in mind a "State" during the founding of the country was it's own country. Just like the United States is technically a "state". What is the benefit of a State to join a Union if they are viewed as a lesser? Also, consider the United Nations. Should the larger countries call the shots or not? The United Nations is a confederation. Why would a State like North Dakota want to remain part of the United States if they State has no authority due to their smaller population? We don't hear of it and nobody would ever think of it, but a State could succeed from the United States. The other argument is, why should large cities make the call for the rest of the country? Is what happens in New York, Philly and LA more important than what other areas of the Country need? If States ceased to exist, then we could move to a popular vote but that won't be happening. EDIT: I want to add that if people choose to live in the same city, that shouldn't mean the power should be shifted. Think of it in terms of real-estate. If you want to live in NYC that's your choice and you'll have to pay $15,000 a month to get an apartment that would only cost you $600 a month in Ohio. There-fore, it's your choice to live in a big city and it's your choice to live with the fact that the electorial college is in place. A lot of people move to a big city due to their company needing them to relocate, not the majority, but more likely they are voters. The bulk of the population does not vote. This isn't a basis for an argument for the college, but more or less an idea to be thought about.
What is bad electoral college?
Here's one reason: the electoral college forces a two-party system. Why? Because in order to win the presidency, you need a majority of the electoral college, not the plurality. If two candidates are competing, then it's much easier to obtain this majority. However, if three or four or five candidates are competing for this majority, the chances increase that nobody will be able to receive a majority of the electoral college, thus throwing the country in a constitutional crisis every election. The power of the Republicans and Democrats at the federal level trickles down to the state level, which results in every election at almost every level being a contest between Democrats and Republicans. No parties can gather up the same resources that those two can. That makes being a third party in the US quite difficult. Up until the Seventeeth Amendment (1913), Senators were chosen by state legislatures, not the people. Representatives were the only elected officials at the federal level chosen directly by the people. And that's what the electoral college does - it prevents the people from directly electing the president. It's a check against tyrants and demagogues, but most see the original reasons behind the electoral college as outdated. I think the electoral college made sense in its own time, although I can see why some people think that its worn out its welcome. Problems arise when the electoral college and the popular vote don't match up. The most recent occurrence of this was in 2000 between Bush and Gore, but it's happened several times in US history. Even though the national popular vote simply doesn't matter to the president election, people still insist that candidates who don't receive the most votes nationally aren't legitimate. They are according to the Constitution, which is what matters. So, the only way to change that is to amend the Constitution. Until that happens, the popular vote is completely irrelevant to who wins presidential elections.
What are 3 strengths and 3 weaknesses of the Electoral College system?
STRENGTHS: 1. Way more difficult for someone to buy an election or for someone to rig an election. There are 50 states, but each state has like 100 districts that collect votes. Any corruption would have to come from the district level and each district has its own represenitive. 2. The benefit of this system for which is was created for is now obsolete. 200 years ago there was no media or radio where people could learn about the canidates, in fact they hardly knew who was running. That is why they elected these delegates, so the delegates could follow the canidates and then vote for which one would help their state better. 3. ? WEAKNESSES: 1. Mistakes can happen at the local and district level and once porcesses through the state, can be very hard to track any errors. Such as the case in the election between Bush and Gore when an error occured in Florida. 2. The popular vote of the people is overlooked. Your vote as a citizen does not actually go towards your pick, it actually goes to your state electorate. In Russia, your vote goes directly to the pick. 3. there has been no changes in the legalities of the Electoral College System. It has been around since our constitution, and has never been modernized. For instance: Each state has an elected electorate, or delegate who actually cast the vote on behalf of his state. Now, no delegate has ever used an electoral vote against the wishes of his state, yet there is no single law that could stop him! Say in Michigan, 70% of the stated voted for Obama, that delegate is not bound by law to cast his vote for Obama. Now of course they always do, but it is still scary.
Pros and Cons of the Electoral College?
Bad: The national popular vote does not elect the president - a majority of voters could vote for a candidate who loses the electoral vote and the election. This is anti-democratic as it goes against the will of the majority. Good: The Electoral College promotes federalism and makes national elections truly national. State popular votes, not the national populate vote, elects the president. And electoral votes are not awarded based on population alone, but rather every state gets two extra votes. This favors less populated states as their voting power increases more (i.e. a state with 1 member of the House gets 3 electoral vote an increase of 300%, but a state with 10 members of the House gets 12 votes, only an increase of 20%). Voters in less populated states have a greater share of voting power and are therefore not as ignore as if the national popular vote elected the president.
Arguments against the electoral college?
1) It is an indirect system 2) It is antiquated 3) It causes the candidates to focus on a few states while ignoring states that are "safely" in the hands of the opposition.