It’s time to get rid of the electoral college. To those wondering, this not just reaction to the presidential results. Regardless of the two million vote difference for Clinton over Trump, the removing of the electoral college can be justified.
In the past twenty years, this will be the second time that the electoral college has determined who will be president against the popular vote. Both times, it has been to the benefit of the Republican party, and this time it has elected an imbecile. That’s not to say that the people who voted for him are bad people, but rather that he alone is a bad person.
When the the electoral college was designed, it was intended to give voices to the less populated areas of the country and put some sort of balance into place for the country. It meant that campaigns had to consider everyone’s opinions, not just those in the most populated areas.
Some might point out that the small towns, cities, states, etc. don’t like when big cities make all of the decisions. That’s a valid concern; however, big cities don’t like when rural populations are more powerful, either. That’s a two way street.
Anyway, when it was devised, the electoral college may have balanced the scales. Now, however, it’s not effective at all. During campaigns, there are battleground states, states that rarely switch “sides”, and so most of the country gets very little attention. Again, just a few states that occasionally change direction determine the president. None of that is to mention that the people that the people actually voting in the electoral college are sponsored by political parties, which I would consider some sort of conflict of interest.
In regards to its intentions, the electoral college has failed. More importantly, it can be replaced. There are other methods of voting (which could be applied to more than just the presidential elections) that have been considered for years now. My personal favorite is the concept of ranked voting.
Instead of a direct democracy approach where the presidency is strictly determined by the popular vote, or the voices of the few in the electoral college, a ranked system would benefit the country in multiple ways.
It would work by basically listing all the options (for president, for example) and give you three or so ranks, first being your first option and third being your last prefered option. With some predetermined method, you could calculate which candidate is most preferred overall.
The benefits are significant. Most notably, this means that political parties can no longer pander to only their party bases since they risk alienating a good ranking with the rest of the voters. Just as well, they can’t simply campaign in “battleground states” for the electoral college. It could also be used to battle gerrymandering (more local elections), where the whole population decides together rather than by arbitrary lines on maps.
Of course, this is only one of the many ideas that has been floating around, but the point of them stays the same. During this election, it’s clear that both candidates would have won simply by being the opposite of their opponents. Imagine a voting method that basically punishes candidates for being divisive, rather than the way that this one relies on it.
The electoral college no longer represents the best interest of American voters. If there is one common theme between both parties, it’s that people are tired of having to choose between polarizing candidates and want something to change.