The Electoral College system that decides who becomes president does not adequately represent the views of the people. Therefore, the electoral college system should be replaced with a popular vote system, in which the presidential candidate who gets the most votes in the election will win the presidency, instead of having the candidate who gets 270 electoral votes win. This way, citizens' votes will more accurately reflect their opinions, rather than others voting for them. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The first reason the electoral college is unfair and should be eliminated is that it is possible for a candidate to lose the popular vote and still lose the election. The most recent example of this occurred in the 2000 election, where George Bush lost the popular election, but beat Al Gore in the Electoral College election, 271-266. The Electoral College prevents citizens from having a say in election results. The popular vote represents the will of the people, and many Americans may not know how the electoral system works or even that it exists. Having others vote on behalf of voting citizens takes away their power to choose. Another reason the Electoral College is not necessary is that the system allows contenders to campaign only in a few key swing states to gain voters. Candidates spend most of their time on the campaign trail demonstrating in only a few swing states, and other smaller states receive little or no attention. Those who live in small states like Rhode Island and are not visited as much as they would like will begin to feel that their needs are not being taken into account. With a national popular vote, every voter has the same amount of power, whether they are from New York or Montana. This will force runners to campaign everywhere in the United States, not just a couple of large states.