But a strong majority of the public appears to give more legitimacy to the candidate winning the popular vote, and this may be reason enough to change it. Eliminating the electoral college system would require a constitutional amendment, which is a difficult process bound to be opposed by those who believe the system works in their favor, and it would require great thought be given to the plurality problem. One possibility is a runoff, which is used in other many races but would extend the election process further. On the downside, the selection of electors would, like the election of U.S. Representatives, be subject to gerrymandering by state legislatures. Another decentralized alternative would be for each state to allocate its electors on the basis of proportional representation, rounding up for the highest vote-getter and down for the lowest.
Many parliamentary systems use similar rounding and minimum-threshold rules.
In this election, Nader might have received enough electors to become a kingmaker, forcing one or the other candidate to support some of his positions. While this reform would be easier to enact than a constitutional amendment, it might be blocked by states holding out to get better treatment by the parties. The previous President was Ulysses S. Grant, a Republican. Although history does not always repeat itself, those who voted for Gore may find one potential parallel troubling. Many Americans, particularly farmers, viewed the Republican-controlled White House and Congress as wasteful and too closely aligned with the nation's wealthy elite.