argument top image

Should the Electoral College be abolished?
Back to question

The Electoral College gives a minority disproportionate influence

The way the Electoral College is structured means that a relatively small amount of the population has disproportionate influence. This is fundamentally undemocratic.

The Argument

The Electoral College offers sparsely populated states a disproportionate amount of influence over the electoral process. This influence is magnified particularly in swing states. Some voters in states that are considered 'safe' or electoral strongholds for a particular party under the Electoral College feel that they are dis-incentivised to vote, as their votes do not have equal weighting compared to swing states.

Counter arguments

The Electoral College prevents a tyranny of the majority, where the largest and most populated states would decide all elections. It ensures that voters from sparsely populated parts of the country that continue to have important industries also have a significant voice.



[P1] The Electoral College gives disproportionate influence to a small amount of sparsely populated states. [P2] This is undemocratic and de-incentivises those from larger states from voting.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] It is not undemocratic, it simply prevents a tyranny of the majority.


This page was last edited on Friday, 11 Sep 2020 at 07:27 UTC

Explore related arguments