Every four years america as a whole chooses on who should be the president of the united states. The process of election is straight forward and always follows the same process every election. The american citizens vote on one of the two candidates, then those votes are counted and giving to the electors, then the electors of each state representing the population of said state (including the District of Columbia) votes one of the candidates, after all votes are tallied the winning candidate is elected president. Overall this system seems rather complicated and can be seen as an unfair process at which only to vote on who takes charge of america. The electoral college should be replaced by who receives the most popular votes from all american citizens and not the state electorals.

Electoral college is a process created during the founding of the united states as sort of a "middleground" or compromise on how the people of the country should elect the president (

source 1

). In order for a president to be elected out of the 538 electors that make up the electoral college he or she must at least receive 270 votes (

source 1

). Each president has a group of electors that process your votes in order to choose who the state votes for making it in a ways unfair. This system can come with its own set of problems that include replacement of electors, electors voting to who they feel, and at times one candidate gaining the most popular vote but losing the chance of presidency because of the lack of electorol votes form the state (

source 2

). An example of the unbalanced power is the near success of the louisiana legislature replacing the democratic electors in the 1960, segrigations with new ones that would oppose against John F. Kennedy making him lose the popular vote.

The best replacement for the electoral college is to allow the citizens of america to vote upon who should be the president of the U.S without the need for electors. The candidate that receives the most votes is the one who becomes the president of the united states. In order to process all possible millions of votes into a rational percentage and the candidate with the higher percentage would in turn become president. With this in mind the candidates would need to visit all or largely selected states in order to deliver campaign speeches to persuade the population to vote for them, because with the electoral college system candidates would focus mainly on tight races in the "swing states" practically ignoring other like in the 2000 campaign seventeen states didnt see their candidate (

source 2

). The electoral college only focuses on the large numbers and not on the smaller population that can still make a difference making the system unfair. Making them only focus on the big states because how many electoral votes it could bring compared to a smaller state which could possibly only supply three.

On the other side electoral college does have a good standing as a method of vote. Electoral college has five good reasons on why it shouldn't be replaced and they are certainty of outcom, everyone's president, swing states, Big states, and avoid run-off elections (

source 3

). Each campaign party chooses their electors which rarely end in betrayel making it possible to win the election with low popularity votes. The electoral system also gives the candidate a chance to win in a "landslide" because of the winner-take-all basis at which it follows (

source 3

). No region has enough votes to elect a president also the electoral college needs to have transregional appeal. And the main goal of the electoral college is to obviously elect a new president but as well avoid runoff elections.

The electoral college is an unfair system of voting because of how it all depends on a small group of selected representatives and not all of the american population as a whole. Even though it can be regarded as a fair middle ground it still has its flaws and doesnt reach out to society as a whole only focusing on the states that can lead to victory, casting out those who's electoral votes will not make much of a difference. In the end the voting system should mainly focus on popularity of a candidate than what the "state" feels they should vote for because of how many votes they actually received for a given candidate due to the fact that it may end up voting on which who they feel and refuse to vote for their partys candidate. The electoral system should be replaced.