Should the electoral college be abolished?
No, the electoral college ensures representation of the whole country instead of just major cities
The following is a 3 message exchange between 3 users
The Electoral College has a history of going against the majority. The EC was also just made because we couldn't count each vote independently
@9GYW53D5mos5MO
The Electoral College ensures that all parts of the country are involved in selecting the President of the United States. If the election depended solely on the popular vote, then candidates could limit campaigning to heavily populated areas or specific regions. By providing clear and decisive victories, the Electoral College contributes to political stability. It encourages a two-party system and rewards candidates who have broad, nationwide support. The Electoral College recognizes the importance of states in the American federal system. As a federation, the balance of power is important… Read more
@VulcanMan6 5mos5MO
These are terrible arguments.
First of all, ANY national voting system "ensures that all parts of the country are involved" because any system that involves the entire country fundamentally does that, not just the Electoral College; a popular vote system would also "ensure that all parts of the country are involved", so that argument doesn't even make sense, much less in the Electoral College's favor.
Secondly, the Electoral College already limits campaigning to specific regions: swing states. That's why current campaigners can effectively ignore any states that always vote for the same party, and instead focus on just the states that they have a chance of flipping (which is why they're also called "battleground states", because those are the states where candidates fight over). A voting system withoutRead more
