Electoral College Should Be Abolished

As one of the most controversial elections in history, the 2016 presidential elections between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump marked another year where the popular vote did not coincide with the electoral vote. The fact that Trump won the election even after losing the popular vote by over one million votes, brought an already ongoing debate to the forefront: To keep the electoral college or not? Some critics believe that it creates an emphasis on largely populated states and others argue that low-populated states are given greater, unfair representation. Regardless, both arguments share a common thread: an inequitable representation. The electoral college should be abolished due to being undemocratic, over representing small states, and depriving third parties of a fair chance.
Part of a democratic nation involves the equality of rights. However, in utilizing the electoral college, it is possible for the candidate to win presidency with a minimum of eleven states (Doc A). Yes, it is highly improbable for a candidate to garner all the support from the states with the highest electoral vote but the fact that the possibility exists is highly undemocratic since it would ignore more than half of the states. In continuance in its unfair representation, the electoral college does not equivalate the votes of every person. For example, twelve states has approximately three hundred thousand less people in population than Illinois, yet those states receive a total of forty-four electoral votes in comparison to Illinois’ twenty votes (Doc D). It gives the people from the twelve states a higher representation than those in Illinois which is the opposite of the United States democratic