Due to the way the Electoral College is set up, it’s possible to win the presidency without winning the majority of popular votes. Because

Against

This is the system set up by the founding fathers; stick with tradition. It gives low-population states a say in federal government where higher population states might overwhelm them, if possible.

For

It’s unfair for the person who wins most votes to lose. All votes should have the same power. Giving more power to voters in low-population states is unfair.

Explanation:

Against

~This is the system set up by the founding fathers; stick with tradition.

~It gives low-population states a say in federal government where higher population states might overwhelm them, if possible.

For  

~It’s unfair for the person who wins most votes to lose.

~All votes should have the same power. Giving more power to voters in low-population states is unfair.

Explanation:

first we should be know that the term electoral college does not appear in the Constitution but the  Article number  II in Constitution and the 12th Amendment refer to electors, but not to the “electoral college.

so for make any change should be  necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change

so over 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress  but no body have fared well since 200 YERS  

THE MOST  arguments can be made for getting rid of the Electoral College was from  The American Bar And they said it was archaic and ambiguous.

arguments could be made for keeping it as is  Since the Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution it would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system.  

Hello again! It looks like we're having a great debate here!

Let's first talk about the arguments that we can make in order to keep the electoral college as it is.Using electors instead of the popular vote.

Our Founding Fathers thought this was the best way to safeguard against the uneducated vote, as this was a method designed to put the final decision in those who had the most relevant information for the country's best interests.

It was an attempt to prevent the states with the largest population to have an advantage over those who had smaller populations, and to balance the will of the American people against the 'tyranny of the majority', which is further discussed in the next point:

Ensuring a country decision vs a majority decision.

Let's imagine that the Electoral College system was different. This would turn into politicians spending all of their effort in the most populated countries in the US, and give little atention to the smaller areas. Farmers in Iowa or Ohio factory workers would be completely ignored.

Guaranteed certainty of outcome.

In the same way as it happened with President Nixon in 1968, or President Clinton in 1992, both candidates won the most electoral votes while receiving just 42% of the popular vote. If elections were based on popular vote, any candidate could receive the highest number of votes without actually obtaining a partial majority.

So, let's now talk about the reasons to change the actual voting system:The system is no longer relevant due to our modern technology.

Our day-to-day has changed drastically, and now we have powerful tools that create better statistics that our Founding Fathers could have not foreseen. The technology that we have these days allows voters to have the necessary information to make an educated vote, and we can use and manage that information in more efficient ways.

The Electoral College ignores the will of the people.

There are over 300 million people in the US. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by over a million voters, however, she still lost the elections. Does this make any sense? Why did she lose the election, if more people wanted her to be elected? That's because, at the very end, only 538 people choose the final outcome.

Swing States.

Both Democrat and Republican parties can count on winning the elections in certain states. Let's take California for instance, where there is a heavy inclination towards the Democratic party. Or Indiana, where the exact opposite happens. Because of this, candidates only have to worry about certain states where there is a chance that voters go one way or the other, and there is no guarantee for the final outcome.

There is indeed a lot that can be said about the Electoral College, and we can only wait to see what the future holds, as these are times of great change and new ideas.

Have an excellent day!

Some arguments for getting rid of the electoral college, is that the electoral college is not fair to urban areas because they are under represented. Rural areas like Wyoming are over represented, but areas like California is underrepresented even though it has the most electoral college votes. Therefore the electoral college is not fair to urban areas.

An argument to how we should keep the electoral college, is how it makes sure uneducated people do not have much of a say. The way electoral college works is that regular citizens vote, and that sways the views of the electoral college people. The electoral college is very educated and bases their decisions off of what the people voted on. This ensures that the uneducated still have a say, but are not making the complete decision. This is good because it ensures the people electing our president are educated and understand what is happening.

These two arguments are debatable and I do not completely agree with either of them, but I studied about both sides and these are two possible arguments.

The answer is below

Explanation:

1. In simple terms, one of the arguments that can be made for getting rid of the Electoral College is that "Without the Electoral College, every vote throughout the country would be equal."

2. On the other hand, one of the arguments that could be made for keeping the Electoral College as is that the "Electoral College protects the rights of the minority so that equal protection prevails."

it further strained relations between the north and the south and convinced

i think that it would be tenth of the first