# data[].attributes.body
Document A makes it clear that the Electoral College is set up in a way so that a presidential candidate would only have to win 11 states in order to become President. In other words, 39 states could vote against you and you would still become POTUS. This method of counting is unfair, inefficient, and seems to ignore a large segment of the country. To me, that's not democratic.

# data[].attributes.headline
In the document A, we can clearly see that it's giving reasons to abolish the electoral college because it's showing us the number of people who represent every states for the electoral vote and we can see that bigger is your states, bigger is the number of people voting so that means that if you live in a small state as North Dakota, you have less power to elect the president.

# data[].attributes.subject
In the document A, we can clearly see that it's giving reasons to abolish the electoral college because it's showing us the number of people who represent every states for the electoral vote and we can see that bigger is your states, bigger is the number of people voting so that means that if you live in a small state as North Dakota, you have less power to elect the president.

# data[].attributes.body
Paul, I would argue that the smaller states have MORE power in the Electoral College than the large states. In CA, each "elector" represents ~700,000 people. In Wyoming, each "elector" in the Electoral College represents ~200,000 people! Whoa! The people of Wyoming seem to have more say than the people of California.

In the document B we can clearly see that they are saying "don't abolish the electoral college" because we can see in the boards with the old president names with the percentage of each president at the popular and electoral vote and we can see that when someone win the popular vote, he is winning the electoral one so it's not changing anything and the third candidate always have 0 percent at the electoral vote.

# data[].attributes.body
In this document you can see how the electoral college is not for the American people. The voting system is set up to look like average Americans are voting directly for the president. This is not the case, in fact only 11 states would have to vote in favor of a candidate for them to win, but only 50.1% of the 11 states would have to vote for that candidate as well. There is a clear margin in the popular voting statistics and actual election outcomes in many elections.

# data[].attributes.body
Grayson
Even though a candidate can win with 11 states, the states are spread out between the regions.

# data[].attributes.body
(Faith Scott/Faith Barrett)
Document A shows how the electoral votes are distributed though out the states. Smaller states like the Dakotas receive 3 votes even though based on population they should only have 1. The states don't get treated equally because the states that have more say are the lower states such as Montana, South Dakota, and etc.

Document B shows how almost 20% of the American population can vote for a particular person, in this case Ross Perot, and have the Electoral College disregard it and none of them vote for the 3rd party candidate.

# data[].attributes.body
Gavin and Nick

Document A supports the destruction of the Electoral College because it makes it to easy to win the presidency. A candidate would only have to focus on one or two regions of the country to win the presidency, in other words someone could ignore 50-75% of the country and still become the president.

# data[].attributes.body
Based off the information in Document A, it seems very unfair how each state has a different amount of electoral votes, for different amounts of people. For 10 of the most populated states, one electoral vote is given for an average of every 600,000-800,000 people, but then you have less populated states like Wyoming where an electoral vote goes to an average of under 200,000 people. Also you can win 22% of the states in the country and still become Prez. On the other hand, think about winning over 3/4 of the country and still not being elected.

# data[].attributes.body
Document A favors abolishing the Electoral College by making it clear that a candidate could only win the electoral votes of 11/50 states and still become President of the United States, which is undemocratic since this does not fairly represent the people of the other 39 states.

Document B argues against abolishing the Electoral College by providing examples of elections where the winning candidate won both the popular and electoral vote therefore showing that elections are still heavily influenced by the people and are in fact democratic.

# data[].attributes.headline
In the document C they are against abolishing the electoral college because they are saying that even if that's not the easiest system, not the most efficient, but that's the one who elect the right president and not a clown

# data[].attributes.subject
In the document C they are against abolishing the electoral college because they are saying that even if that's not the easiest system, not the most efficient, but that's the one who elect the right president and not a clown

# data[].attributes.body
In the document D, it is against it.
They are showing us that if you put all together the 12 smaller states, you have and a total of 12,500,722 in the population you have 44 electoral votes and Illinois for example have a 12,830,632 population, they only have 20 electoral votes because they have only 2 judges compared to 26 judges, + the votes with the population. So you can just focus on some states, and just leave some others all alone in their campaign and win.

# data[].attributes.body
Nick and Gavin

On the flip side, document A also supports the Electoral College because it is a system filled with highly educated, elite members of society, who know what they are doing, and also who take the election, and the election process very seriously.

# data[].attributes.body
Document A provides information that could be used to argue for  abolishing The Electoral College. The map shows that a candidate could win the majority of the East Coast and win the election without having to campaign in the west.
Doc B
Document B also provides information for a "get rid of the EC" argument, because the charts show that if an election ends up with 3 final candidates it doesn't even give the odd man out a chance

# data[].attributes.body
Nick and Gavin

Document B shows that the Electoral College can be biased towards third party or independent candidates at times. In the chart in Document B, all of the statistics of the elections are provided, but in each election the independent party candidates did not fair well.

Document B

However, Document B supports the Electoral College as well and it shows that Republican and Democratic candidates tend to fair well in the elections and they tend to have the best chances of succeeding in the election.

# data[].attributes.body
Kaydee, Jordan, Jasmine
Document A shows that the minimum of states a candidate can win is 11 and if you want to be the president of all the states you should care about all of them. You shouldn't be able to only pay attention to winning 11 states and leaving out 39.

# data[].attributes.body
Doc B shows us the very wide difference in % between the popular vote and the electoral vote. In both the 1980 and 1992 Presidential Elections, the winner of the popular vote also ended up winning the electoral vote. In 1980, Ronald Reagan won the popular vote by 9.7% over Jimmy Carter, but won the electoral vote by 82%. Also if you run as a third-party candidate, or an independent canddiate, after getting part of the popular vote, you'll have little to no chance for electoral college votes due to the electors being Democratic or Republican.

# data[].attributes.body
(Faith Scott/Faith Barrett)
Document C shows that the Electoral College gives the States an important role in choosing the president and which support our democracy.  Having the Electoral College also keeps federalism within our government which has been in our country since we created it.

Document D says that the Electoral College violates political equality by allowing 3 particular people to vote for hundreds of thousands of citizens. Alaska for example receives 3 votes for having 710,231 people within their state.

# data[].attributes.body
This document also can be used to argue against the electoral college because in 1980 Ronald Reagan only won the citizens popular vote by 0.07% but demolished the electoral college with 91% votes. He would win either way but 0.07% is very different than 91%

# data[].attributes.body
Nick and Gavin

Document C supports the Electoral College because, it is a system where all the states get a say in what happens, and it helps support Federalism which is a key part of our government, and helps to run our government efficiently.

Document C

On the other side though, the Electoral College is a system that is complex and can be sometimes hard to understand. Sometimes it really isn't that effective in its execution either. If no-one obtains that 270, or the majority votes, than the election is throw to the House Of Representatives for them to decide, and that does not seem that efficient.

# data[].attributes.body
Kaydee, Jasmine, Jordan
Document B shows that often the popular vote is not the same as the winning electoral vote. In 1992 over half the country didn't vote for Bill Clinton but he won as president because of the electoral votes, which isn't necessarily what the people wanted.

# data[].attributes.headline
In the document E, they are for the abolition of the electoral college because it's saying that the electoral vote is slow, and there is no independent candidacies, the rich people who really know the economy don't show up to the presidential, people don't have their words etc,,, Everyone is creating alliances so that a single guy is gonna get "destroyed".

# data[].attributes.subject
In the document E, they are for the abolition of the electoral college because it's saying that the electoral vote is slow, and there is no independent candidacies, the rich people who really know the economy don't show up to the presidential, people don't have their words etc,,, Everyone is creating alliances so that a single guy is gonna get "destroyed".

# data[].attributes.body
In the document F, it is against the electoral college because he is scared with the tie were the state delegation are making the choice and he thinks that a small states would have as much power as a big one and he don't like that (I don't share he's thinking because I feel that that would be the best system but when you read it, it's more oriented to the "against").

# data[].attributes.body
Kaydee, Jasmine, Jordan
Document C states that the Electoral College is a good system because it demonstrates good government and legislation that takes care of a large and diverse country. The electoral college gives states an important role in choosing president and it supports federalism. The Electoral College keeps the extremes from having too much power.

# data[].attributes.body
Grayson
The electoral college makes if very difficult for the party or extreme candidates. The electoral has given our nation some of our best presidents.

# data[].attributes.body
Nick and Gavin

Document D is a document that is all about getting rid of the Electoral College. In the table found in document D, the table basically shows you, that Illinois has basically the same population as 12 states and D.C. But somehow, those 12 states get around double the electoral votes, that Illinois gets. George Edwards, does not agree with this, and he seems to think that this goes to show just how unfair the Electoral College really is.

Document D

We honestly do not think that there is a single part of document D that supports keeping the Electoral College. The whole documents is basically a anti Electoral College advertisement.

# data[].attributes.body
document A states that the electoral college should be abolished because in order to win, all a candidate needs is to win a minimum of 11 states. this is not fair because if the candidate manages to win those 11, the 39 other states don't have much say.

# data[].attributes.body
(Faith Scott/Faith Barrett)
Document E discusses how the Electoral College makes certain candidates who supports taxing the rich, open boarders, and religious based laws more difficult to become president.

Document F shows that the if the election ties then they would have to give the election to the house of representatives which each state only gives one vote.

# data[].attributes.headline
In the document G, it is against the electoral college because on those four elections, the guy with the most popular vote always loose the electoral one, so what the people think doesn't count, so your judgment doesn't count. I think that's not really true because it's not because the people voted for you that you are the good choice, maybe we should keep the electoral and giving him a "refresh", new rules...

# data[].attributes.subject
In the document G, it is against the electoral college because on those four elections, the guy with the most popular vote always loose the electoral one, so what the people think doesn't count, so your judgment doesn't count. I think that's not really true because it's not because the people voted for you that you are the good choice, maybe we should keep the electoral and giving him a "refresh", new rules...

# data[].attributes.body
Doc C
In document c its clear that it's pro electoral college. Mitch McConnell states, that though The Electoral College is complicated it's an important role in the political prosperity of this country and "it has formed our political parties, moderated our more extreme elements, and forged the presidential campaigns that have given direction to our ship of state

# data[].attributes.body
Document C gives us two passages from John Samples and Mitch McConnell. John Samples explains that the Electoral College helps preserve the Federalist System the US depends on. Mitch McConnell explains that even though the Electoral College can sometimes be hard to understand, it limits power to each state so we can have a diverse nation.

# data[].attributes.body
In document b, it states that they are for keeping the electoral college because in both elections, the person who won the popular vote also won the electoral vote, meaning that in a way, the election was still influenced by the people.

# data[].attributes.body
Kaydee, Jasmine, Jordan
Document D says that in 2010 Illinois had a population of 12,830,632 people and only gets 20 electoral votes whereas 12 states + D.C had a population of 12,500,722 people and gets 44 electoral votes. There was a bigger population of citizens in Illinois and they got less electoral votes.

# data[].attributes.body
Nick and Gavin

Document E definitely supports the Electoral College. The document says that getting rid of the Electoral College will ultimately result in the acceleration of the falling apart of our political parties. It also says that if the Electoral College falls apart then the presidency becomes a popularity contest where anyone can run for president, and they have a chance at winning too.

Document E

Document E also supports the Electoral College, it states that the Electoral College tends to produce winning margins that appear to be national decisiveness. The Electoral College may be inefficient sometimes, but ultimately it tends to work.

# data[].attributes.body
Document D shows that population has NO effect on electoral votes. How is it fair for 12 states and a district to combine for a smaller population than 1 state just by itself (Illinois), but yet they have over 2 times as many electoral votes?? Yes, population matters when it comes to dividing a state into districts but when 2 senators are

# data[].attributes.headline
Document A shows that the Electoral College is set up so that a presidential candidate would 11 states in order to become President. Which means that 39 states could vote against you but you can still become president. I think this is unfair because if 39 didn’t want you and 11 did that's a little unbalanced Jordan Barrow

# data[].attributes.subject
Document A shows that the Electoral College is set up so that a presidential candidate would 11 states in order to become President. Which means that 39 states could vote against you but you can still become president. I think this is unfair because if 39 didn’t want you and 11 did that's a little unbalanced Jordan Barrow

# data[].attributes.body
Nick and Gavin

Document F supports getting rid of the Electoral College. It discusses what would occur if there was a tie in the vote. The system seems like it works good, but the way it deals with a tie doesn't work good at all. I mean if there is a tie, the people don't get to decide, the states don't even get to decide the HOR does and that doesn't seem fair

# data[].attributes.body
(Faith Scott/Faith Barrett)
In document G, the candidates

# data[].attributes.body
(Faith Scott)
In document G, the candidates are being favored by how the population is for each state and each electoral result has differed by popular results.

# data[].attributes.body
Document E explains how the Presidential Election is suppost to be a two party race. This is to keep people who don't belong as president, from receiving votes. Also when the President needs to be elected with a majority of the Electoral Votes, having more candidates takes away the possibility of the winner having that majority.

Document F explains that if there were to be the event of a tie in the electoral vote, each state will get 1 vote. Out of the 50 votes, the majority becomes the next president. But with each state only getting 1 vote, that means 1 vote for Wyoming's 1/2 million is equal to the 1 vote for California's 35+ million people.

# data[].attributes.body
Document E states that abolishing the Electoral College would only damage the election process. They believe it will encourage any millionaire or uneducated people to run for president and it would make it more difficult to be able to decide who is best for the country.

# data[].attributes.body
Document F proves that a tie in the electoral votes could result in unfair voting ratios and the people being unheard. If this were to happen, it could lead to picking a candidate that the majority of the country doesn't agree with.

# data[].attributes.body
Document G provides a chart with evidence that for four elections in a row the electoral vote disagreed with the popular vote. In 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000 the Electoral College elected a president that the majority of the people did not agree with. During these years, the popular was completely being ignored.

# data[].attributes.body
Document shows how the popular vote meant absolutely nothing to the electoral college. One of the elections (1824), not only did Jackson win the popular vote but he had the most electoral votes. But because he didn't have the majority, the House had each state vote and Adams campaigned to each of the representatives and ended up winning the most states, becoming POTUS.