What’s wrong with the Electoral College

At the moment, most states in the United States of America will have an overwhelming majority of citizens voting one way or another. The issue with this system is the misrepresentation of votes within a single state. Only a simple majority is required to delegate all electoral college votes to a particular candidate in the election at hand. Most recently, the 2000 election decided George W. Bush as our 43rd president of the United States despite garnering a lower number of total overall votes compared to Democratic candidate Al Gore. The electoral college allows for a gross misrepresentation of popular opinion in America.

This system was created to allow smaller states within the US to hold a greater presence during presidential elections. States like Iowa and Ohio now have an impact on the general election despite their small populations because of the electoral college’s creation. One of the problems the electoral college strived to fix was presidential candidates ignoring smaller and insigifinicat states during thier campaign. The harsh truth, however, is that candidates will often still focus on major states such as Texas and New York, while only focusing on smaller states right before their primaries to enhance their presence. Smaller states are still largely ignored during the campaigning time of major presidential candidates.

States like Nebraska and Maine are ahead of the curve with their national election policies. Both of these states split their electoral college votes, which allows for a greater representation of who the state actually supports. States like California, Texas, and New York, who are traditionally either Republican or Democratic, could greatly benefit from this system due to the large pockets of minority voters in the respective states. The splitting of electoral colllege votes not only shows a more realistic view of the country’s political divide, but eliminates the uselessness that many voters feel when they go to vote in states like New York or Texas where a majority of one party traditionally dominates.

The 2016 election is a unique case where this sort of system could easily help identify the most populous candidate. The electoral college, no matter what, will end up electing a skewed candidate who was not favored by the majority of voters in the United States. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the expected Democratic and Republican nominees respectively are both criticized by their own parties. This is a unique election where neither candidate is fully supported by their respective party. In a torn political system where lies and sensationalism is dominating the atmosphere, the only rational way out is a populous vote. The only way for such a vote to occur is with a splitting of electoral college votes in each state. Any other solution will lead to a President of the United States who is neither favored by the general public nor prepared for such a position.

The only positive thing the US can learn from this miserable election season is that the US Government needs to rethink the way the electoral college is structured. When choosing between the lesser of two evils, popular vote needs to be considered. Any other decision is jaded and incorrect. Low voter turnout further skews this system and perpetuates the idea that the average voter in California and Texas’ vote means nothing when determining the future 45th President of the United States.

Like what you read? Give Kevin DePriest a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.