Manipulation of America’s Democratic Process
The Electoral College was created as a compromise between direct popular elections and congressional selection of the president. In practice, critics argue it can distort democratic outcomes in ways that conflict with basic majority-rule principles.
Commonly cited “Commom Sense” failures include:
* A candidate can win the national popular vote but lose the presidency. This has happened multiple times, including in 2000 and 2016, leading many voters to feel their ballots carried unequal weight.
* Swing states receive disproportionate attention. Campaigns focus heavily on a small number of competitive states while safely Democratic or Republican states are often ignored, even if they contain millions of votes.
* Votes are not weighted equally. Because every state receives electors based partly on Senate represenstation, voters in smaller states effectively have slightly more influence per person than voters in large states.
* Most states use a winner take-all system. A candidate who wins a state by a tiny margin usually receives all of its electoral votes, meaning millions of opposing votes in that state have no effect on the final outcome.
* The system can discourage turnout. In heavily partisan states, voters may feel their presidendtial vote does not matter because the statewide outcome is considerd predetermined.
Supporters argue the system protects federalism, encourages coalition-building across regions, and prevents candidates from focusing only on large population centers. Critics counter that the Electoral College can overide majority preference and weaken the principle of equal representation in a modern democracy.
NO COMMON SENSE
ANALYZE THE EXAMPLE
* Which supports and barriers were in play?
* What were the dynamics?
* Who, or what, won the Tug-of-War?
* Discuss the outcome with your friends and family.
* Use Post #4 as a reference for the dynamics and relationships betwee supports and barriers.
