Today there's a good chance Romney gets more votes, yet still loses, right? Nate Silver basically guaranteed an Obama win, but recent polls have had Romney up 49-48. Based on that happening to Gore, a democrat, and if it happens to Mitt, what are the chances we do away with the electoral college? People from about 43 states are voting today and their vote barely matters. I hate that. I'm in a blue state, I'm going to vote for Mitt even though I don't want him to win. I want him to get more votes, yet still lose. Everybody's vote should count equally.
There's a good reason for the electoral college and I support it. If Romney wins the popular vote but loses the elctoral vote, then so be it.
What is this reason. I was trying to find why we have it and could only find 2 reasons. That the founders did not want direct election to the presidency becuase the public can be manipulated too easily, though I don't see how the electoral college will keep people from being manipluated. The other reason was that it was a comprimise to make small states happy by making their (popular) votes count more than votes from larger states. I know it can't be changed without 3/4 of the states agreeing so that will never happen, but what benefit does it really serve?
One of the primary reasons was "favorite sons" candidates. For example, if the most populated state had the Presidential nominee and the second most populated state the Vice Presidential nominee for one party, and the two least populated states had the nominees for the opposing party, then by virtue of being from heavily populated states they pick up extra votes they would otherwise probably not get. Therefore, it precludes nominees from low populated states...
