The Electoral College

         The election of 2000 was very strange indeed because Gore won the popular vote, but lost the Electoral College. So Gore got about  560,000 more votes than Bush, and Bush really benefited from the fact that the electoral vote is not completely based on population size. Each state gets as many electoral votes as they have members in the House of Representatives and the Senate. States’ House delegations are based on population, but each state has two Senators. So every state gets at least three electoral votes, regardless of population, essentially two extra votes not based on population. Bush carried 30 states, while Gore carried only 20 states and the District of Columbia. Thus Bush got a net benefit of 18 electoral votes not based on population from carrying more states than Gore.

So now that, that is in your knowledge I can now say that I think that the Electoral College is a valid way to elect a president because it helps even the littlest states be heard because popular vote doesn’t matter much and the runner ups can actually go to the state to speak and pay attention to them.

The Electoral College has been around for a long time and with that, our technology has become more advanced, travel and communications are no longer a fret, we all have access to every word spoken by all the candidates. And even though there are some CONS like:

1.  When the winner of the Electoral College is not the candidate who received the most votes of the people, the new president will face questions about his legitimacy.

2.  Most Americans believe that the person who receives the most votes should become president.  Direct election is seen as more consistent with democratic principles than the Electoral College system.

 
3.  The Electoral College gives disproportionate weight to the votes of citizens of small states. For example, a vote by a resident of Wyoming counts about four times more, electorally, than a vote by a California resident.

4.  The Electoral College system, especially in a close election, is subject to the mischief that might be caused by disloyal, or even bribed, electors.

But there are also a good amount of PROS like:

1. The Electoral College, in recognizing a role for states in the selection of the president, reminds us of their importance in our federal system.

2. The Electoral College encourages more person-to-person campaigning by candidates, as they spend time in both the big cities and smaller cities in battleground states.

3.  In close, contested elections, recounts will usually be confined to a state or two, rather than an across-the-country recount that might be required if we had direct election of the president.

 
4.  The Electoral College, with its typical winner-take-all allocation of votes, often turns a small percentage margin of victory into one that appears much larger, thus making the victory seem more conclusive and adding to the winner's perceived legitimacy.

So as you can see, there is a bad side and also a good side. The good side is better for the common good and is also a very efficient way to elect a president or vice president.