Direct Popular Vote should replace electoral vote in presidential elections.

My partner and I can see no reason to do anything other than affirm the resolution Resolved: Direct popular vote should replace electoral vote in presidential elections. This is so for two reasons. First, direct popular vote better represents the people, and second, the electoral college is outdated. Allow me to provide you with a few definitions from Merriam Webster dictionary. Democracy is defined as rule by the majority. Observe that direct democracy and indirect democracy both are focused on giving the power to the people. Contention 1: Direct popular better represents the people. Sub point A: The people prefer direct popular vote to the Electoral College. Polls were conducted on each state that asked American voters whether they would prefer direct popular vote for presidential elections. In every single one of these state polls the majority of people wanted a direct popular vote in the presidential elections. Many of the states voted over 70% for direct popular vote, and states like Oklahoma voted up to 81%. Ironically, the smallest state that would be supposedly "counted out" in the direct popular vote, Wyoming voted for popular vote, 69% of the Wyoming citizens taking this poll favored popular vote. Another Gallup also had a poll that showed 64% of the nation wants a popular vote for presidential elections. It is obvious that the people want a direct popular vote for presidential elections and since our government is a government of the people, we need to give the people what we want; it is time to switch to direct popular vote. Sub point B: The Electoral College goes against the one person one vote idea. The American Institute for Public party policy research found that one vote in Wyoming is worth four times as much as a single vote in California. In representing the people, we ought to represent all of them equally one person one vote is the only right way to do this, that is why we need to favor direct popular vote over the electoral college. Contention 2: The Electoral College was designed in a different time where the situations were different than they are today. William C. Kimberling, Deputy Director FEC Office of Election Administration, when writing about the Electoral College says ""In order to appreciate the reasons for the Electoral College, it is essential to understand its historical context and the problem that the Founding Fathers were trying to solve. They faced the difficult question of how to elect a president in a nation that: first, was composed of thirteen large and small States jealous of their own rights and powers and suspicious of any central national government Second, contained only 4,000,000 people spread up and down a thousand miles of Atlantic seaboard barely connected by transportation or communication (so that national campaigns were impractical even if they had been thought desirable) Third. believed, under the influence of such British political thinkers as Henry St John Bolingbroke, that political parties were mischievous if not downright evil, and last, felt that gentlemen should not campaign for public office (The saying was "The office should seek the man, the man should not seek the office."). It is obvious that the Electoral College was made for a different society than today. The Mike Garibaldi in an article in the Huffington post wrote "There is no use for the archaic Electoral system in our modern, mass communication driven, interconnected world. U.S. citizens think and vote on a more regional and national level now. It's time to elect the President and Vice President of the United States by direct, popular vote." We are in a new time than that of where the Electoral College was made, so we need to change our presidential elections to direct popular vote rather than the Electoral College. And it is for these reasons that I urge a Pro ballot