Children's Web magazine...
Entertaining , Educational, Fun,Informative and MORE

Another major factor of contention is how the Electoral System tends to promote a two-horse race for the presidential election. Because the majority of the American population tend to vote for either the Republican or Democratic candidate running in the election, it means that, due to the ‘winner-takes-all’ convention established in the 19th century, that the winner of the Electoral College votes from a state is usually from one of the two major two parties. This means that, within such a climate, the winner of the presidential election tends to win the popular vote as well. In 26 of the 39 elections held between 1864 and 2016 (i.e. two-thirds), the winner gained more than 50% of the popular vote. This is seen as an asset to the system as a by-product of a clear win of the popular vote is national unity. After a long and potentially divisive campaign, a symbol of national unity is essential in helping the country recover. However, the fact still remains that in a third of all them elections the winner did not gain 50% of the popular vote. This shows that the Electoral College system cannot boast of perfection in its ability to produce a symbol of national unity. Furthermore, in promoting a two-party system the Electoral System ostracises third independent party candidates. In the 2016 general election, Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party won 3.2% of the vote and yet did not win any Electoral College votes. This means that the votes he did receive were not reflected in any bid for the presidency – the votes were effectively annulled. The relatively low percentage of the vote he did receive is also emblematic of the way in which American voters feel forced into picking out of only two candidates. The 2016 election race candidates were dubbed as the ‘the most unpopular ever’. In this regard, voters may feel like their vote is worthless in that they do not like either of the major party candidates. As a result, voter turnout can be low, as it was in 2016 with 55%. Therefore it is clear that whilst the Electoral College system can be seen to produce symbols of unity presidents, this is not always the case, and, in doing so, marginalises third party candidates thus narrowing the choice given to the American population.

In an attempt to resolve this issue, the proposal of a proportional system has been put forward. This would mean that the Electoral College votes in each state would be allocated proportional to the popular vote in that state. This has been put forward in light of the unfair and undemocratic results of some of the general elections. The bulk of this argument for a reform to a more proportional system is because the ‘winner-takes-all’ convention can majorly distort the result. In 2016, Donald Trump did not even win the popular vote (he only won 46.7%) and yet won 306 Electoral College votes, whereas Hillary Clinton won the popular vote with 48% and yet only received 232 Electoral College votes. 

Image Credits: parade.com