The founding fathers created the electoral college so that big cities would not be the deciding factor in elections. They recognized that the needs and desires of rural communities might be drastically different then those of big city dwellers. For the vast majority of our history, the electoral vote has aligned with the popular vote with few exceptions. Those exceptions favored Republican candidates. It seems to me like the exceptions were more due to better campaigning by Republican candidates, who went after the electoral votes, rather than flaws or unfairness in the electoral system itself.
I’m shocked then, that the socialists running for high office are talking about abolishing the electoral college!!! Doing so would disenfranchise a majority of States as the votes of the citizens of those states would be nullified by just a small handful of big city states.
Does the results of the electoral votes that won the election for Republicans cause you to believe the electoral system should be done away with? If the results had gone the opposite way and won elections for Democrats, would your opinion be different?
The founding fathers created the electoral college because they didn’t want the people choosing the president at all. They wanted the president chosen by political elites who aren’t as uninformed as the general populace.
In part yes but providing more representation to low population states doesn’t require an electoral college. The entire premise of having electors make their independent judgement (as was initially intended) has nothing to do with state representation.
That’s interesting… slaves were counted as population which determined electors but were not allowed to vote. That seems to be a pretty big factor, in my opinion.
Are you trying to argue that the northern states wanted to include slaves in the population count? When you say large and small, are you discussing population or area?
