Electoral College: Outdated and Useless

Why vote for president? Does the presidential vote matter? No. At the formation of the United States, the Electoral College was created to help uneducated voters. This system is outdated and useless. Why does it stll exist? How can we get rid of it?

I think the whole President thing was a sham. Only 4 year term's for people who are the executives of America. Youd think we'd need a loyal person in office that would learn and get better through the years who could only be replaced when the public belives his term is done..

Maybe part of the reason was "to help the uneducated", but primarily, it's to keep the small states from being left out of the process. A Constitutional amendment is likely the only way to change it, and I indeed believe it should be abolished, as it is anathemic to democracy to have people from small states have a vote that counts for more.

Originally posted by rrahim1
I think the whole President thing was a sham. Only 4 year term's for people who are the executives of America. Youd think we'd need a loyal person in office that would learn and get better through the years who could only be replaced when the public belives his term is done..

Sounds like a recipe for a dictator. Now, term limits are not wise, it tends to produce "lame duck" syndrome, but I still think terms are, for how else would one coordinate a democracy?

The electoral college is still important and your assertations of how and why it was created are completely false.

It was created to give the states the right to set their own election policies and to preserve states' rights such that elections won't just be determined by the largest cities and states. These reasons are just as valid now as they were 200+ years ago.

I don't know how to quote, but this is from wikipedia:

"An electoral college is a set of electors, who are empowered as a deliberative body to elect a candidate to a particular office. Often these electors represent a different organization or entity with each organization or entity represented by a particular number of electors or with votes weighted in a particular way. Many times, though, the electors are simply important persons whose wisdom, it is hoped, would provide a better choice than a larger body. The system can ignore the wishes of a general membership whose thinking may not be considered. When applied on a national scale, such as the election of a country's leader, the popular vote can on occasion run counter to the electoral college's vote, and for this reason there are some who feel that the system is a distortion of true democracy in a democratic society."

Sooo... who won the popular vote in 2000? Bush or Gore?

The people should chose the leader. The People.

It is defined in the constitution, so it is not going to change.

Contrary to the previous post, it was set up intentionally to prevent the large states from dominating the national process. Under the electoral system, the small states have disproportionately more influence than their populations would have in a direct election, and the larger states have less influence than their populations would otherwise have. It does level the playing field somewhat. Not a perfect system, but all things considered a more even distribution of power than a direct election.

It is not going to change. a constitutional amendment would require the 13 smallest states to voluntarily give up their power and influence. Unlikely to occur.