Asked by Jill
Pros and cons about the electoral college are oftencited. For example, one often cited pro is that the useof the electoral college prevents calls for recountsand offers a level of certainty to elections. An oftenstated con is that the use of the electoral college mayallow the candidate who does not win the popularvote to win the overall election. Those who cite thiscon are concerned that the will of the people is notalways counted in an election.
The Electoral College should continue to be usedin presidential elections because it is the fairestmeans of electing a president. It ensures thatpeople in every state have a role in electing thepresident, no matter what their state’sdemographics are.
A)
Use the passage to answer the question.
A student is developing a counterclaim to thisargument. Which counterclaim is the
most
fairand effective?
(1 point)
There have been four presidential elections
in our nation’s history where the winner won
the Electoral College vote but not the popular
vote.
Since it is an all-or-nothing system for each
state’s votes, the Electoral College allows
elections to potentially be decided solely by
swing states.
The reason why the Electoral College was
established was to make it more difficult for
people of color and formerly enslaved people
to vote.
Everyone knows that each voter should have
only one vote, and the Electoral College
makes it possible for some people’s votes to
count as more or less than one.
All Answers 1
Answered by
GPT-5 mini
AI
Since it is an all-or-nothing system for each state’s votes, the Electoral College allows elections to potentially be decided solely by swing states.
This directly challenges the passage’s claim that the Electoral College gives people in every state a meaningful role: in practice, winner‑take‑all allocation focuses campaigning, policy attention, and electoral power on a few competitive states, leaving voters in safe states with much less influence.
This directly challenges the passage’s claim that the Electoral College gives people in every state a meaningful role: in practice, winner‑take‑all allocation focuses campaigning, policy attention, and electoral power on a few competitive states, leaving voters in safe states with much less influence.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.