That's because Hillary Clinton easily won the statewide vote, and in our old and useless system of electing presidents, that means she will be awarded all of the state's votes in the Electoral College when the state's electors meet this Monday. Some are begging for the Electoral College to rebel and pick someone else for president. So should we give out equally votes in the Electoral College based on a state's land? So what are the reasons for continuing the Electoral College? Madison's Notes are the best source we have of what went on behind the closed doors of the agreeing with, or related to, the Constitution, Convention that gave in a will us the Electoral College.
As Madison pointed out, the Electoral College helped the slave states. In almost the same way, some people argue that the Electoral College is also designed to protect small states. In fact, they point out that the Electoral College system is designed to work in a clear and sensible series of defaults: if, in the first instance, a candidate receives a big majority of the popular vote,then that candidate is almost certain to win enough electoral votes to be elected president; in the event that the popular vote is very close, then the election defaults to that candidate with the best distribution of popular votes as shown/proven true by getting the complete and total majority of electoral votes; in the event the country is so divided that no one gets a complete and total majority of electoral votes, then the choice of president defaults to the States in the U.S.House of Representatives.
Should that happen today, there are two possible formal statements about something: either one candidate could throw his electoral votes to the support of another before the meeting of the Electors or else, except for an complete and total majority in the Electoral College, the U.S.House of Representatives would select the president going along with/obeying the 12th Change. A second way in which the Electoral College does not in a way that's close to the truth or true number reflect the national popular will stems mostly from the winner-take-all machine/method/way within which/by which the presidential candidate who wins the most popular votes in the State wins all the Electoral votes of that State.
And the Electoral College was designed to represent each State's choice for the time when someone is president/being a president with the number of each State's electoral votes being the number of its Senators plus the number of its Representatives. The result is that in 1988, for example, the combined voting age population, 3,119,000 of the seven least full of people legal control/area of legal control of Alaska, Delaware, the District of Columbia, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming carried the same voting strength in the Electoral College 21 Electoral votes as the 9,614,000 people of voting age in the State of Florida.
Small section/take a small piece of from an original document located at Jackson County, MO Election Board Fighters against someone or something of the Electoral College are disturbed by the possibility of electing a minority president one without the complete and total majority of popular votes. A second way in which a minority president could take office is if, as in 1888, one candidate's the support of most people were heavily mainly located in a few States while the other candidate maintained a slim popular lead in enough States to win the needed majority of the Electoral College.
What is the electoral college? First of all, it's not really a college. We vote for the list of electors who go on to vote at the electoral college.
How did the electoral college come about? Can two candidates split one state's electoral votes? In those states, there could be a split of Electoral votes among candidates through the state's system for proportional allocation of votes. For example, Maine has four Electoral votes and two Congressional districts. It awards one Electoral vote per Congressional district and two by the state-wide, “at-large” vote. Can the electors change their minds? With the election centering around a few people who vote in one state, there is the clear/separate possibility that one candidate could win the popular vote and yet lose the election. People who say bad things or give opinions, on the other hand, argue the electoral college is at best and outdated, and at worst a standing near or threatening political disaster.
In conclusion, the Electoral College should be removed because american citizens should actually vote for their president. American people who lawfully live in a country, state, etc. are childlike because of a lack of understanding of the function of the Electoral College because they believe in error that they directly elect the President and Vice President when in fact the "Electors" representing the candidates cast the Electoral College votes.