Ad
related to: why the electoral college is bad
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
“The Electoral College today works very differently from the way that I think the founders envisioned it,” Dr Panagopoulos says. “The framers envisioned an independent group of people who ...
Carolyn R. Dupont is a historian and professor at Eastern Kentucky University and the author of “Distorting Democracy: The Forgotten History of the Electoral College — and Why it Matters Today.”
Electoral college undermines democracy, say critics, who call for its abolition to ensure voters’ voices are heard and their votes count. From our readers:
The closest the United States has come to abolishing the Electoral College occurred during the 91st Congress (1969–1971). [14] The presidential election of 1968 resulted in Richard Nixon receiving 301 electoral votes (56% of electors), Hubert Humphrey 191 (35.5%), and George Wallace 46 (8.5%) with 13.5% of the popular vote. However, Nixon had ...
The Electoral College was officially selected as the means of electing president towards the end of the Constitutional Convention, due to pressure from slave states wanting to increase their voting power, since they could count slaves as 3/5 of a person when allocating electors, and by small states who increased their power given the minimum of ...
The Electoral College also disproportionally represents smaller states. The number of electoral votes a state receives is equal to the number of senators and representatives a state has.
The closest that the United States has come to abolishing the Electoral College occurred during the 91st Congress (1969–1971). [1] The presidential election of 1968 resulted in Richard Nixon receiving 301 electoral votes (56% of electors), Hubert Humphrey 191 (35.5%), and George Wallace 46 (8.5%) with 13.5% of the popular vote.
The Electoral College acts as a safeguard to one of the primary fears of the Founding Fathers: tyranny. James Madison argued that a pure democracy paved the way for tyranny.