July 10, 2012
The “Electoral College” Archaic but Worth Keeping
Every four years the United States enters the frenzy of election. Presidential candidates from multiple parties get ready for a campaign across the nation to gain popular support from both the delegates and the people. The presidential candidate not only has to win the popular vote, but also the majority votes in the Electoral College. The Electoral College serves to elect the president and the vice president of the United States. It is a form of indirect election which is opposed by many. Those who oppose the system fear that the Electoral College will allow the possibility of a minority president or a faithless elector, while people who argue in favor of the electoral system believe that Although the Electoral College is archaic and flawed, it is still currently the most sufficient form of election for the President; though changes may be made, it is unlikely that the entire system can be replaced. Over the two hundred plus years that it has existed, the Electoral College had been criticized by a number of critics. One of the main reasons that people propose for a reform or to eliminate the Electoral College system entirely is because this system creates a possibility for a minority president to be elected. For example, if the country is deeply divided between three or more presidential candidates, the candidates could end up splitting the electoral votes in a way which none of them would obtain the necessary majority. Moreover, if one candidate’s popularity is concentrated in only a few states while the other candidate maintained a small lead in enough states, he or she could have the needed majority to win Electoral College. Although this occurrence has happened many times through the political history of America, but it if were to occur again today, the only way that the election would end with an absolute majority is when one of the candidates throws...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document