The constitution was certainly created and helps maintain a democratic nation. It describes and establishes a democratic government and a particular set of laws. The men who wrote the Constitution were not elected. There were indeed great leaders, but there was no formal electoral process in place to select them and draft the document. The Constitution was drafted behind closed doors and signed by its authors. It was not passed in the same way that laws and bills are passed today. The people of the new American nation did not have the same ability to contribute and make a choice that we benefit from today. With this, one could say in a way that this was particularly undemocratic. Should winning presidential candidates win by popular votes and not electoral votes? For this reason, winning presidential candidates should be represented by voters. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay As the founder of this country, the presidential candidate is chosen by the electoral college. The Electoral College is a group of people appointed by each state, who will officially elect the country's president and vice president. And these electors are selected by the population of the states, which is why some states have more representatives. The electoral college system opens a Pandora's box of voters who do not vote as the American people demand. The Electoral College misinterprets the notion of equal representatives of each state. Not only is there a chance that the presidential candidate will win by the popular vote, but they will not win in the election. For example, in the 2000 presidential election, the Republican candidate won the election, even though he lost to the popular candidate. With the Electoral College, this situation has become very likely. The presidential candidates won by the Electoral College were unfair in representing the nation's voters (Dahl). He also went on to give an example showing that a vote in Wyoming is worth about four times as much as a vote in California (Dahl). In fact, bills proposing a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College are routinely introduced in every Congress (William). If presidential candidates are won by the Electoral College and lost by the popular vote, do the people's votes really matter? Do the votes of the people really count, when the Electoral College should be abolished and the system should be the popular vote? With the Electoral College, voters would not know whether their vote counted or not. They are not the ones who elected the presidential candidates, even if their names appear on the ballot. With the way the electoral college is set up, they might even vote for your choice of candidate or elect someone who doesn't represent you. Where voters lived may make their vote useless due to their state's population. There will be a point where the presidential candidates are tied and that is when the popular vote will come into play. If this situation actually occurs, then the House of Representatives and the Senate will have the power to 'elect the president (Ginsberg). As Dahl says, in order for the Electoral College to represent the voters, it would be highly desirable that "the Electoral College be abolished in favor of direct election by popular vote" (Dahl). With the way in which the Electoral College presents the right to elect the?