The process of the electing the Presidenet is a topic commonly debated upon. This topic must be carefully examined because the President of the United States plays a major role in leading our country and must be chosen with care. The two ways of electing our president is by the Electoral College which dates back to the founding fathers, or by the popular vote which is a more modern process. The question is, should the electoral college remain the current voting process or should we change to electing the president of the United States through popular votes? Whether you are in favor of the Electoral College or against it there are consequences to both sides. Presidential election through popular votes may have disadvantages, yet the Electoral College must be changed becuase voters are not in complete control and reduce the probability of an elecotral tie.

To begin, according to Richard A. Posner the Electoral College is a fair accurate way to elect the president. The Electoral College requires the canidates to have a multi-regional appeal and allows the most thoughtful voters to decide the election unlike the popular vote. Richard A. Posner notes in his article that the Electoral College avoids a canidate that is a regional favorite to gain votes and win. The Electoral College requires the canidates to  have  a "trans-regional appeal" (Posner). If we used a process that allowed a canidate with only regional appeal to be elected as President this would increase the chances of electing an ineffective, successful president. Additionally, the Electoral College allows only the most thoughtful voters to decide who becomes President (Posner). Canidates will be chosen more carefully and thoughtfully. These voters will have gained the most accurate information and apply this to thier choice. Thus, the Electoral College has some beneficial outcomes, but the popular vote is a better choice for our system of choosing the President.

First of all, changing to electing through popular votes could fix the problem of voters not having a big say in who become the President. In Bradford Plumer's article he includes that voters can't always "control whom their electors vote for". All of the residents of the United States who choose to participate in the presidential election should be able to have their voice heard individually. Voters should not have to rely on their state electors to choose the right president. Additionally, voters not being able to have thier voice hears affects which canidate becomes elected. Sometimes the electors can go against the opinion of the people (Plumer). Electors should not be the only ones that are allowed to have responsibilty in picking the President of the United States. Electors could totally "defy the will of the people" and it is unfair that they are responsible for the whole process of choosing the President of the United States. Thus, the popular vote is a better choice because the people of the United States should have a bigger say in thier President.

Secondly, changing the electoral college to popular vote could not only help voters have their voice heard but, it could also reduce the probability of a tie in the electoral vote.