In a presidential race, the candidate with the highest popular vote can lose to a candidate with the lower popular vote if the candidate with the lower popular vote has more electoral votes. Originally, the electoral college was created to compromise the people's vote with congress’ vote. Some people argue that the electoral college should be changed or abolished while others think that there is nothing wrong with it. The electoral college needs to be changed because one party should not be able to change the possible president and the House of Representatives should not either, but there does need to be a secure way to elect a president.
The Electoral College works and provides a stable form of federal government that cannot change and provides a plan that has little amounts of disorder. In Article 2, section 1 of the United States constitution it states, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors,equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:” (Document 2) …show more content…
In the 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. There was also a third party candidate named Ralph Nader. Nader was a Green party candidate and Green parties tend to side with Liberals or Democrats. Bush barely won the election (as Al Gore had the popular vote) and many people argued that the only reason Bush won was because Nader threw off the votes for the democratic party. (Document 5) This is a problem because a small third party candidate can greatly throw off a key state and then change the entire outcome of the election. Third parties should not be able to change an election because they might cause a great mistake in the final candidate chosen as the new president of the United States. Basically, third parties can change
The Electoral College works and provides a stable form of federal government that cannot change and provides a plan that has little amounts of disorder. In Article 2, section 1 of the United States constitution it states, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors,equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:” (Document 2) …show more content…
In the 2000 election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. There was also a third party candidate named Ralph Nader. Nader was a Green party candidate and Green parties tend to side with Liberals or Democrats. Bush barely won the election (as Al Gore had the popular vote) and many people argued that the only reason Bush won was because Nader threw off the votes for the democratic party. (Document 5) This is a problem because a small third party candidate can greatly throw off a key state and then change the entire outcome of the election. Third parties should not be able to change an election because they might cause a great mistake in the final candidate chosen as the new president of the United States. Basically, third parties can change