Replacing the Electoral College

Federalist 68 justifies the Electoral College as necessary to prevent the voters from selecting a bad President in their ignorance; and many pundits see the Electoral College as a protection to ensure smaller states aren’t ruled over by larger states—although that’s the job of the Senate.

These justifications stem from a mixture of elitism and the false dichotomy of the Electoral College versus a national popular vote. We must replace the Electoral College with something better than a popular vote: a unified majority.

Unified majority always selects the candidate most-representative the voters as a whole. It uses a nonpartisan blanket primary to allow the voters to pick candidates representing their diverse views, rather than just their parties.

The voting population selects its candidates, then identifies the candidate of greatest mutual consent.

The voters then use a Condorcet election to elect the candidate most-favored overall. The candidates emerging from the primary represent agreement among smaller portions of the population, and so the candidate with broadest appeal will be among them.

Under this system, candidates follow the changing views of the American people. Rather than anchoring to the platforms of either major party at each end, the left and right ends are the left and right ends of the voters’s views.

A more-liberal voting population this year.

While a simple popular vote and the Electoral College can jump wildly from Green to Red to Green, the unified majority system requires an enormous shift in overall political ideology to make such drastic changes in representation. Rather than winners and losers, the voters reach consensus and agreement.