Many Americans are for the electoral college, and I have no idea why. Everytime I ask people, they give me a the same vague answer: "It protects us smaller states and rural folk." This is completely false. The electoral college doesn't protect these states any more than the actual democratic system. Let's compare Iowa to California. Say most of Iowa wants one candidate, most of California wants another president. With the electoral college, Iowa gets its few votes and California gets its many. The majority still dominates. The city people get more votes than the rural people. In fact, rural people get even more screwed under the electoral college. Ideally, the elector college is supposed to give the rural people a bigger voice, and it is supposed to prevent presidents that help the city people and hurt the rural people get voted into office, just because there are more city people. This is its only argument. Say there is a situation like this, where a candidate is good for the city people and bad for the rural people. Under the electoral college system, if there are more city people in a state then they win and the rural people lose. Take California for example. The city people outnumber the rural people. They vote for the ruler good for the cities, and California is won. The rural peoples' votes don't even count! How does this help rural people?
Besides the only argument for the electoral college being faulty, there are plenty of reasons the whole concept is just plain stupid. The whole thing is completely undemocratic. A president that wasn't wanted by the majority of the population got voted in! This completely contradicts the principles of democracy.
The worst part of the electoral college is that it makes people's votes not count. In a real democratic system, the people's votes count. Not in the electoral college. When I am old enough to vote, I will not vote for a conservative leader. However, whoever I vote for does not matter. Idaho is a conservative state, if I vote for someone like Howard Dean it won't matter, all of Idaho's votes are going to go to the conservative candidate. This is the very reason voter turnout is so low. If you are the minority, your votes don't even count. If I voted for Dean next election and there was no electoral college, my vote could count and have an effect on who will become president. But because of the electoral college, my vote is worthless. It means nothing. My voice is not heard.
This whole system creates a situation that is the same as someone's vote counting as more than one vote. Pretend 51% of the population of a state votes for one president. This is the equivalent of if in the real democratic system every person voting for that president having their vote count as 1.9 votes, and everyone voting against him having their vote count as 0 votes. According to the constitution, "All men are created equal." How does this policy reflect that to the least bit?
Besides the only argument for the electoral college being faulty, there are plenty of reasons the whole concept is just plain stupid. The whole thing is completely undemocratic. A president that wasn't wanted by the majority of the population got voted in! This completely contradicts the principles of democracy.
The worst part of the electoral college is that it makes people's votes not count. In a real democratic system, the people's votes count. Not in the electoral college. When I am old enough to vote, I will not vote for a conservative leader. However, whoever I vote for does not matter. Idaho is a conservative state, if I vote for someone like Howard Dean it won't matter, all of Idaho's votes are going to go to the conservative candidate. This is the very reason voter turnout is so low. If you are the minority, your votes don't even count. If I voted for Dean next election and there was no electoral college, my vote could count and have an effect on who will become president. But because of the electoral college, my vote is worthless. It means nothing. My voice is not heard.
This whole system creates a situation that is the same as someone's vote counting as more than one vote. Pretend 51% of the population of a state votes for one president. This is the equivalent of if in the real democratic system every person voting for that president having their vote count as 1.9 votes, and everyone voting against him having their vote count as 0 votes. According to the constitution, "All men are created equal." How does this policy reflect that to the least bit?
Comment