It is often said that "change is good." This saying is one way to describe my feelings towards the Electoral College. The sources "What Is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal Register, "The Indefinsible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wronga' by Bradford Plumer, and "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner show the pros and cons of the Electoral College. The Electoral College should be taken over by popular votes because all Americans should have a say in who their next leader will be.

The Electoral College may disregard what their voters say and vote for another candidate to be our next President. In paragraph 11 of the source "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer it is declared that "faithless electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate." Voting citizens of America vote for a reason. They vote for who they want to be President, not who the party's electives want to be President. Voters should be able to trust their electors, otherwise their votes are going to a candidate they voted against. Another key point of this unjust way of voting is that people have to put their trust into unknown electors. It is stated in paragraph 16 of "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner "each of the party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee." These electors may be "trusted", but to the unknowing voters of America they are ordinary people who could betray someone very easily. All it takes is one elector disobeying his promise to the candidate he chose to represent to have the fate of American changed.

The winner of the election may lose by popular vote and win by electoral votes. This is an unfair advantage that the Electoral College has to the common voters. Voters expect to vote for who they selected, not who the Electoral College selects. It is empahsized in paragraph 10 of the source "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plummer in which "voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors." In simpler terms, this is saying you don't vote for the next leader, you vote for people who may choose the next leader. The people of America vote for a reason, to choose our next leader who will support our country. They don't vote to have a College of unknown Electors choose the next President. It should also be noted that you're techniacally not even voting for a President. It is disputed in paragraph six of "What is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal Register "when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors." In other words, you don't even choose your candidate, just people who are trusted to vote for them. American voters want to for the nex president, not a board of Electors that they are unsure will trust them.

On the contrary, there is the possibilty of it being a very close election where it would require the Electoral College to choose a President. In paragraph 18 of the source "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" Richard A. Posner states "a dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College vote is less likely than a dispute over the popular vote." The popular vote might be back and forth between the Presidents, but an electoral vote would create more of a landslide win. In the end, the cons of the Electoral College outweigh the pros of it.

The Electoral College is an unfair way of choosing our country's next leader. The change of this ancient voting would be a very good and appreciatef one. If America really let the people of America choose, they would let the popular vote be the deciding factor for our next President of the United States.