Learning about the Electoral College has been interesting to me because I politics is intriguing to me and there is an election coming up. I have always been somewhat interested in politics since before I could understand what was going on; I have taken classes in high school and college about government and politics, and now am planning to minor in Political Science. This affects me, and everyone, for the simple reason that it is the process that elects someone to be the most powerful person in the free world. The President of the United States dictates foreign and domestic policy, controls the biggest military in the world, and has a major influence on every major bill that is put through congress; needless to say, the President has a major influence not only on the American people, but everyone worldwide. Changing the process that puts this person in office would be a major change to a government that has not seen change in quite some time. Being 19, the most experience I have relating to politics is watching House of Cards religiously. Regardless of my lack of first-hand experience, I do understand the process of the Electoral College and how it works. In doing so, I also understand what some argue as flaws in the system. 

The first source I am using to help answer my research question is "In defense of the Electoral College" by Richard Posner. Posner argues the Electoral College is a good process because the alternative, a popular vote, would kill the power of the office due to the recounts that would be required. Secondly, the Electoral College requires a President to have transregional appeal, aka, the President can't just dominate one section of the country and win. Thirdly, it encourages swing voters in battleground states to be well-informed. The major value in the article is the fairness of the Electoral College and the history that comes with it. What's at stake is the Office of the President and the state of the democracy. Richard Posner is credible because he is a tenured federal judge for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. Because of his profession, Posner has a good understanding of how the Constitution intended the Electoral College to work and why. Posner's bias is very clear and his argument lacks the evidence that a convincing argument normally has, however, his argument is still effective. When arguing his point, he reasons through the material in a way that is concise and easy for the reader to follow.

The second source I am using is "Outdate Electoral College Should Be Replaced with Direct Popular Vote" by Oliver Tonkin. Tonkin is obviously for the replacement of the Electoral College. He cites more than a couple Presidents that have lost the popular vote, but have continued on to win the Presidency because they won the Electoral College. He calls the current system undemocratic because it does not make every vote around the country equal. By his logic, since not everyone's vote carries the same weight, we are not living in democracy. He is in favor of replacing it with simple, popular vote. The main values involved with this article are democracy and equality. Because of the electorate system, Tonkin argues that we are not all equal if our votes are not all equal and that we are no longer a democracy because of it. Tonkin is a credible author for a couple reasons, he is one of the chief political correspondents for The Daily Nebraskan, and is one of the editors of the newspaper. His bias is very obvious throughout the entire piece, however, his argument is very methodical and he lays out all of his evidence in a simple way that is easy to understand. 

The last article I use is "America's outdated Electoral College". This article is also very against the Electoral College for a number of reasons. First, it argues the Electoral College was created when slavery still existed, giving the Southern states the power and the incentive to put this voting system into place. It is also argued that there is no point in voting in some states because it is obvious who is going to win those states' electoral votes. However, in the battleground states the importance of the vote is magnified. In addition the, the candidate who has lost the popular vote, has won the election multiple times. The main values in the article have to do with the equality, or lack thereof, at the time of the creation of the Electoral College. In addition, it values the lack of equality with the present voting system because of the dominance of the two party system in some states. Although the author of the article is not known, he or she is credible in the way the article is written. The way everything is argued is very methodical, all the evidence is presented in a clear and brief manner, and all of the evidence presented is true. Because of the way this article is argued, and the evidence is presented, the article is credible.

Whether or not the Electoral College should be replaced or not has been a controversial issue for the last hundred years. There are always people unhappy with the outcomes of elections and will do anything to help the candidate of his or her choice win the office. Because of this, there is never a real consensus as to which electorate system is fair or not. It is also important to know, the Constitution would have to be amended to change the voting system, something that is not easy to do and has not been done in a long time. Reading all these sources with these different perspectives has helped me understand where their stance is coming from. Although I absolutely think we should keep the Electoral College in place, reading all these articles has helped me understand. Of all the solutions I have seen, my favorite would be to divide the country into 50 voting districts of equal population, basically disregarding all state lines. It would keep the Electoral College in place while solving the equal representation problem. When considering solutions to the Electoral College, one has to realize that is incredibly hard to ratify and amendment to the Constitution. After the reading all these articles, I believe my research question is excellent because it is arguable, controversial, and is very meaningful with the 2016 Presidential election fast approaching. 

