Many people have been asking themselves the same question, "Should the electoral college stay or go?". Having the electoral college is not a fair way of choosing for presidency. People want to vote for a president, not a slate of electors to have them vote for the president. Some people worry about the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. Changing the way we Americans vote is a fair way for citizens to see that their vote truelly does count.

The electoral college is unfair to voters. Accoriding to

Source 2 , "Having the winner-take-all system in each state, canidadtes don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winnning, focus only in the "swing" states." Seventeen states didn't see the canidadtes at all during the 2000 campaign and some of the largest media companies didn't get to see ads for the campaign. That was a way for people to change their mind if maybe the canidadte did visit their state. Citizens in their state shouldn't be voting for someone else to go vote for president. People are into the idea of choosing the right leader for our country, so having the popular vote shows what people think on the canidadtes.

People do worry about the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. If this does happen we know that the House of Representatives will take charge, where state delegations vote on the president. Since having the electoral college, each state shows only one vote, so for example, 500,000 voters represent a state and then having 55 representatives from another state, who then represents 35 million voters is not a fair of choosing a president. And the House's selection can hardly be expected to represent the will of the people. Bradford Plumer states in

Source 2 , thagt the election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe.

So maybe changing to popular vote instead of having electoral college is a good and easier thing.