Why America Needs to Rethink Its Presidential Election System

Historical Foundations of the Electoral College

Electoral College Flaws address the undemocratic Electoral College that came into being as a compromise favoring the slave-holding and smaller states participating in the drafting of the Constitution of the United States. The Electoral College emerged from a compromise at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. Framers sought a system that balanced power between populous and smaller states while avoiding the pitfalls of direct democracy and legislative selection. They feared mob rule and lacked confidence in the average citizen’s access to sufficient information to make informed decisions. Instead, they created an intermediary body where electors would cast votes for president based on state outcomes.

This system also reflected compromises on slavery. Southern states, where enslaved individuals could not vote, demanded representation based on population. The infamous Three-Fifths Compromise inflated Southern influence in the Electoral College. Thus, the institution inherently served an anti-democratic purpose at its inception.

The Electoral College Flaws addressed in this post subvert the Enlightenment ideals such as all men are created equal, and the radical idea that people may elect their leadership. Yet the Compromise of 1787 corrupts the trust in the electorate to select the best candidate.

It could be argued that the founders were right given that we have had our share of incompetent and corrupt presidents elected and at least twice with minority voter support. Yet, the popular vote has also reinforced the idea that people can accurately elect the right person for the job at the right time. To name a few, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson (despite his flaws) Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, John F Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, and Barack Obama to name just a few.

Elections In Which the Popular Vote Was Overruled

Of the 60 presidential elections in U.S. history, five resulted in the Electoral College overriding the popular vote. These instances include:

1. 1824 – John Quincy Adams defeated Andrew Jackson after no candidate secured an electoral majority. The House of Representatives determined

the outcome.

2. 1876 – Rutherford B. Hayes lost the popular vote to Samuel J. Tilden but won the presidency due to contested Electoral College votes.

3. 1888 – Benjamin Harrison defeated Grover Cleveland, winning the Electoral College while trailing in the popular vote.

4. 2000 – George W. Bush became president despite losing the popular vote to Al Gore, due to a decisive ruling on Florida’s electoral votes.

5. 2016 – Donald Trump won the Electoral College despite trailing Hillary Clinton by nearly 3 million popular votes.

While these instances represent only 8.3% of all presidential elections, their significance lies in their far-reaching and I suspect, unintended consequences. Each of these elections deeply polarized the electorate, leading to questions about the legitimacy of the winner and eroding public trust in the democratic process. According to the Berkeley School one could win a presidential election by winning a mere 11 of the 50 states.

For example, the controversial 2000 election left the nation divided over the Supreme Court’s intervention, while the 2016 election reignited debates over voter disenfranchisement and Electoral College reform. In the ultimate irony, the founder’s fears of mob rule came into direct play in 2021 when a mob of supporters of Donald Trump tried to overturn the Electoral College certification of the election of Joe Biden as the 46th President of the United States. Surely this supplies evidence for the elimination of this anti-democratic institution to address the Electoral College Flaws

Does Frequency Minimize the Problem?

Supporters of the Electoral College argue that its rare interference in the popular vote—just 8% of elections—does not justify its elimination. They claim that the system works as intended, protecting smaller states and ensuring a geographically balanced presidency.
However, rarity does not negate the magnitude of the problem. Each time the Electoral College overrules the popular vote, it undermines the principle of majority rule, a cornerstone of democratic governance. This dissonance damages public faith in elections, especially when these outcomes coincide with periods of heightened political tension.

Moreover, the rarity argument overlooks systemic issues inherent in the Electoral College. Disproportionate representation for smaller states, the “winner-takes-all” system, and the focus on swing states create persistent inequalities, regardless of whether the popular vote is overruled. These flaws distort campaign strategies and voter influence, perpetuating a system where millions of votes carry unequal weight. The Electoral College Flaws are exposed each time the popular vote is traded in for the less popular candidate. Standouts like Benjamin Harrison, George W Bush, and Donald Trump deepen the divisions running through the fabric of the United States doing far more harm than good.

The Case Against the Electoral College

Critics argue that the Electoral College undermines democratic ideals. By design, it gives disproportionate power to smaller states. For example, a vote in Wyoming carries much more weight than one in California. The imbalance distorts representation and creates a system where the popular will can be ignored. It is the core of the Electoral College Flaws.

The “winner-takes-all” approach exacerbates this problem. Even if a candidate wins by a single vote, they receive all the state’s electoral votes. This effectively silences millions of voters in states with close margins or those leaning heavily toward one party.
Proponents of the Electoral College claim it protects smaller states from being overshadowed by large urban centers. However, critics contend this argument no longer holds weight. Modern communications and transportation have significantly reduced regional barriers. Furthermore, the overrepresentation of rural voters creates resentment and division, contrary to the framers’ intention of unity.

The Electoral College also incentivizes presidential candidates to focus on swing states, ignoring vast portions of the country. In 2020, just 12 states received the majority of campaign visits, leaving others neglected. This narrow focus undermines the idea of a president who represents the entire nation.

Addressing “One Person, One Vote”

The Electoral College conflicts with the democratic principle of equality in voting. The “one person, one vote” standard, upheld in landmark Supreme Court cases like Reynolds v. Sims (1964), demands equal representation. Yet the Electoral College entrenches systemic inequalities, granting some voters significantly more influence than others.

Replacing the Electoral College with a direct popular vote would align presidential elections with democratic norms. Critics of this change fear that populous states would dominate elections. However, studies show that candidates would campaign nationwide, as every vote would count equally. This shift would encourage greater civic participation and reduce regional alienation.

Conclusion: Electoral College Flaws

While the Electoral College has overruled the popular vote in only five of 60 elections, its impact during those instances has been profound. These elections highlight the flaws of a system that prioritizes geographic representation over the democratic ideal of majority rule. The rarity of such outcomes does not excuse the systemic inequalities baked into the Electoral College, which perpetuates voter disparity and undermines public trust. Replacing the Electoral College with a direct popular vote would strengthen American democracy and ensure that every vote carries equal weight. Want to know more? Click Here

Sources Cited

American Historical Association. (2020). The origins and compromises of the Electoral College. Washington, DC.
Keyssar, A. (2009). The right to vote: The contested history of democracy in the United States. Basic Books.
Levinson, S. (2006). Our undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution goes wrong (and how we the people can correct it). Oxford University Press.
National Archives and Records Administration. (2020). The Electoral College. Retrieved from archives.gov
Peirce, N. R. (1968). The people’s president: The Electoral College in American history and the direct vote alternative. Simon & Schuster.

Suggestions for Further Reading

Amar, A. R. (2012). America’s Constitution: A biography.
Bugh, G. R. (2016). Electoral College reform: Challenges and possibilities.
Dahl, R. A. (2002). How democratic is the American Constitution?
Edwards, G. C. (2004). Why the Electoral College is bad for America.
Fair Vote. (2020). The case for the National Popular Vote Compact.
Koppelman, A. (2021). Burning down the house: How libertarian philosophy weakened American democracy.
Lasser, W. (2019). The limits of judicial power: The Supreme Court and politics.
Rakove, J. N. (1996). Original meanings: Politics and ideas in the making of the Constitution.
Wilentz, S. (2008). The rise of American democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln.

DISCLAIMER: The images on this page, and across the whole blog are created using AI imaging and are intended to illustrate the argument in the post. They are NOT representing real people or events directly, rather the images enhance the argument and nothing more. We do not intend any offense, nor do we wish to single out individuals in any way by the images themselves.

Here are some posts we think you’ll like following this theme

The Genius of Inductive and Deductive Analysis: 8 Examples of Logical Reasoning

Pragmatic Steps for Democrats to Rebuild their Base Rapidly: 5 Basic Ideas or Failure

Examining Taken For Granteds: 1 More Time of Frantic Political Division