Dear State Senator,

Lately there has been lots of tense debates on whether to keep Electoral College votes or not. Well I agree with the citizens who do agree on keeping our votes. Its just rude to take away something we rightfully deserve. Electors come to the campus or a specific area to give their great speech that appeals to what we want to be done just to get our votes. Well Mr. Senator it isn't ok for you and the others in office to just take away Electral College voting.

According to this article written by : The Office of the Fedral register,

" the Founding fathers esatblished it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in congress and election of the President by a popuar vote of qualifed citizens."

that little bit of information says a popular vote I believe the Electoral College is that popular vote. After the electors are selected and meet to discuss who would be Preident and Vice President but also need to count the Electoral votes. Not only does the congress count the electoral votes , there is

538

electors but at least

270

votes are required to elect the preisdent.

In another article it explains how the year of

"2000 was a fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century."

There is a example

Al Gore he won the popular vote but not the presidency

.And that majority would have preferred a direct election. Also the electoral voters system voted slate, an example given from the story was if I lived in Texas I would vote for Jonh Kerry, then vote for slate of

34

democratic electorsthat pledged to Kerrry.

Even with great arguments of wiping out Electoral votes , it will still remain

"unfair outdated and irrational

" I see a picture which shows the number of electroal votes that each state is granted. Some states are granted more than other states but that doesn't stop them from voting. There are fueds over the outcome,picking the president, then goes into the swing states, Big states, and run-off elections .

Now the certainty of outcome of a Electoral vote its not likey to beat a popular vote.

But electoral votes win because those votes are more than popular votes. Back in 2012 voting the article says" Obama recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral votes compared to only 51.3 percent of the poplular votes."

and that help Obama win on the winner-take-all basis. Now with picking the president they can't recieved gain of votes where ever there from or very well favored. A president with regional appeal isn't likey to be a successful president.

Now those swing states, with the winner-take-all method and being awarded with electoral votes. But voters in the toss-up states are the ones who really pay attention and listen to competators in the campagion. And decide the election. But in the big states electoral college restores the political balance which large states lost by virtue. The bug states get more of the canidate attention than small states because big states has more population.

Refering back to the article it says electoral avoids the problems with elections , with that no canidate recieves no votes from that majority.

Imagine back in 1968 with Nixon and Clinton in 1992 both only gotten 43 pecent of the popular votes . The pressure of a run-off election is when no canidate wins , it will greatly make things complicated in the presidental elction.

So no Senator you and your fellow peers whom decided to eliminate electoral votes is dispicable. When we actually have a chance to vote you take it away. Its very clear that without the electoral votes it woud be more than just presidental complication it would also be complication with decideing electors, presidntal electors and the big states who canidates get there precious votes from would have a hard time winning.

I agree to keeping the Electoral College vote and not to change it to no popular vote because popular vote over rules most of the time. So please over think your decsion with other senators and keep Electoral College votes.    