The Negative Effects of the Winner-Take-All Method
In the current US election system, citizens do not directly vote for their next president. Instead, a group called the Electoral College carries out that function. Citizens cast their votes and those votes are tallied up by state. Once tallied, the Electors, also known as Representatives, of the states place their votes. Each state has a certain amount of electoral votes. All of the electoral votes of that state count toward whoever won the state. This is known as the Winner-Take-All method. Whichever candidate has the most electoral votes wins the election, regardless of who had the majority of the popular vote. If neither has the majority of electoral votes, in a presidential election, then the House of Representatives chooses the next president. The Winner-Take-All method has many negative effects.
One negative effect is that all states are not treated equally. Swing states, also called battleground states, have an almost equal amount of supporters for both major party candidates. As a result, both candidates focus more on campaigning in these states than in others. According to …show more content…
Our current election system functions as a two-party system, and only Democratic or Republican candidates have a chance of winning the presidency. Thus, according to Bugh, non-major party candidates do not have a chance of winning the election (51). Hill said this is because “they are a minority perspective competing in a majoritarian Winner Take All system that rewards the highest vote-getters, which, by definition, is not usually a minority” (53). According to David Gillespie, a political science professor, there are about three well-known third parties, but there are also many more minor parties (229-232). As a result of the current system, these parties will most likely never get a chance to have a candidate win the
In the current US election system, citizens do not directly vote for their next president. Instead, a group called the Electoral College carries out that function. Citizens cast their votes and those votes are tallied up by state. Once tallied, the Electors, also known as Representatives, of the states place their votes. Each state has a certain amount of electoral votes. All of the electoral votes of that state count toward whoever won the state. This is known as the Winner-Take-All method. Whichever candidate has the most electoral votes wins the election, regardless of who had the majority of the popular vote. If neither has the majority of electoral votes, in a presidential election, then the House of Representatives chooses the next president. The Winner-Take-All method has many negative effects.
One negative effect is that all states are not treated equally. Swing states, also called battleground states, have an almost equal amount of supporters for both major party candidates. As a result, both candidates focus more on campaigning in these states than in others. According to …show more content…
Our current election system functions as a two-party system, and only Democratic or Republican candidates have a chance of winning the presidency. Thus, according to Bugh, non-major party candidates do not have a chance of winning the election (51). Hill said this is because “they are a minority perspective competing in a majoritarian Winner Take All system that rewards the highest vote-getters, which, by definition, is not usually a minority” (53). According to David Gillespie, a political science professor, there are about three well-known third parties, but there are also many more minor parties (229-232). As a result of the current system, these parties will most likely never get a chance to have a candidate win the