Better Election System: Popular Vote or Electoral College?

Better Election System: Popular Vote or Electoral College?

If presidential elections were decided by popular vote instead of the Electoral College, Al Gore would have been elected president in 2000. How we choose a president profoundly impacts how campaigns are run, the importance of swing states and an election’s outcome. It’s certainly no surprise that the Electoral College vs. popular vote controversy has sparked considerable debate. As the issue surfaces heading into November, is it time to graduate from the Founding Father's Electoral College concept, or are popularity contests no way to choose a president?

Next question in Politics

  • “Popular Vote”
  • “Objection”
  • “Objection”
Tara Ross

Every State Matters in U.S. Presidential Elections

Tara Ross

Author/Legal Writer

Electoral College opponents often argue that “two-thirds of states do not matter” under our current system. Their argument appears true if the focus is on one or a handful of election years in isolation. But the argument loses its force if the full history of states’ voting is taken into account. In this country, there is no such thing as a permanently safe or swing state. Even very safe states can’t be ignored for an extended period of time. They can and will switch their vote next time around.

 

Yes, it probably seems to many voters that states such as California and New York could never again be expected to vote for anything other than a Democrat. Yet their "safe" status is relatively recent. California voted for George H.W. Bush in 1988. New York voted for Ronald Reagan both times. Many of today’s “safe Republican” states—states such as Georgia, Louisiana, or Kentucky—voted for Bill Clinton in the 1990s.

 

The divide between red and blue often seems very stark and hard to overcome. Red states may seem intractably red, while blue states seem just as obstinately blue. But the situation is no more permanent than the stubborn divide between north and south that existed in the late 1800s. Then (as now), the electoral map was so closely divided that neither political party could afford to sit back and rely only on its “safe states.” Instead, each party was motivated to reach out to voters in other parts of the country. The Electoral College helped Americans then to better understand each other and work toward unity. It will do the same now.

 

The swing state issue may create frustrating moments for some voters in the short term. But we are not trying to create an electoral system that will serve one voter in one time and at one place. We are striving to create a presidential election process that will sustain a healthy situation for many generations of voters. A full study of the states’ histories of voting reveals that the Electoral College has done exactly that for more than 200 years.

Post a Comment

Next Argument Previous Next

"Popular Vote" National Popular Vote
"Popular Vote" Common Cause
"Electoral College" Evergreen Freedom Foundation
"Electoral College" Tara Ross
Most Objections

End the Electoral College?

Loading
  • Electoral College
  • Popular Vote
Vote
View Results

Ask Your Friends to Vote

Spotlight

Loading
  • Tara Ross
    Tara Ross is the author of "Enlightened Democracy: The Case for the Electoral College" (2004) and a co-author of "Under God: George Washington and the Question... More

Subscribe to Opposing News

Biweekly updates on new debates and experts

Loading
Thank you for signing up

Please check your email to confirm your subscription.