'Electoral College Essay'

'The electoral College is non on the suffrages cast at a time by the masses but by a mathematical pigeonholing of hoi polloi elected by the citizens. This group of officials known similarly as presidential electors is the electoral College. separately state is appoint a trustworthy number of candidates. In total, the join States has 538 presidential electors. These officials decide which candidates ordain become the next president and frailty president of the United States. I consider the Electoral College should be abolished for many reasons. To amaze with, it gives much saddle to the votes cast in sm every last(predicate) states. Second, since the Electoral College is winner takes every, people who differ with the majority in their state atomic number 18 not represented. Finally, the people should have the justifiedly to choose who govern their country since they atomic number 18 capable enough to do so.\nThe electoral map could be used to reason for abolish ing this simply because of complexity. also it shows how unfair the schema is. A candidate, who loses everyday California by a hardly a(prenominal) votes, receives no electoral votes to show for his or her effort. ( roll A). The Electoral College gives disproportionate power carnal knowledge to the states vote, which favors smaller states with more(prenominal) electoral votes per person. It agency that the smaller states atomic number 18 overrepresented and their votes have more weight than they should per person, compared with large states have little weight per person. I think its unfair.\n base in Document B The fencesitter candidates - Anderson in 1980 and Perot in 1992 - received no electoral votes. This is unfair. Anderson got 7% of the normal vote; Perot got 19% of the popular vote. The winner-take-all Electoral College strategy caused Anderson and Perot to disappear electoral vote in the court. It path that the candidate who receives the some popular votes wi ns all the electoral votes of that state. So 7% of the population in 1980 and 19% in 1992 did not participate in the election. This is unfair because ... '