Room for Debate (Should the Electoral College be Abolished)

Out of all of the discussions in Room for Debates, this was the easiest debate I could correlate with. As a person who doesn't get involved in political topics, I always assumed we used the popular vote for the presidential election. But it wasn't until the past presidential election when I realized, we use an electoral college? We directly have no say who wins the election? Why do we still use the electoral college when we have modern technology that could calculate the popular votes?

Debater Akhil Reed Amar argues that electoral college is a "use of the past." In fact, we use the popular vote for the state elections, so why not use the same system for the national election. 

However, from reading this debate, I realized their are two sides to this argument. Charles Fried argues that the reason we use the electoral college has been used from the beginning. The electoral college is made up of Senators and Representatives who are directly elected by the people. I understand what Fried's stand point. Maybe the reason why people want the electoral college abolished is because they do not agree with who was selected as President. Since the things didn't go their way, there is an outburst. But if the electoral college had chosen someone who was also the popular vote, there wouldn't be an issue. The same electoral college elected some of the nation's great presidents. Why change what already works?

At first, I agreed with Amar completely, use the popular vote. But after reading Fried's stand point, I realized I agree with Fried. The inevitable truth is that we don't always get what we want in life. But, that shouldn't stop of us from being a well-oiled nation.

-haley thompkins