Electoral College was ensured to be the best method to select a president as well as considered as an old method in the present government.
<u>Explanation:</u>
REASONS WHY ONE SHOULD KEEP THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE
- The founding Fathers enacted Electoral College for the welfare of the society. They believed the voting of a huge population wouldn't do better of a country but by the educated scholars who would know who to vote.
- With the involvement of Electoral College, the constitution believed that the counselors would do what they promised and cannot stop doing the good social deeds for the society that they had promised.
- As it was based on the popular vote, it promises the outcome of the presidential election.
REASONS WHY ONE SHOULD NOT KEEP THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE
- As the Electoral College takes the interest of the educated scholars the focus of the people is ignored which builds a great barrier towards the people and the government.
- The ignorance of the society makes the constitution depend on the 'swing states' and neglect other states.
- In today's time, the voters do not really focus on the methods of the Electoral College as it has turned irrelevant and considered something really old.
Electoral College was ensured to be the best method to select a president as well as considered as an old method in the present government.
Answer:
It is often the case in revolutions that many who take a lead role in shaping the new society are not those who instigated a revolution in the first place. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton were both too young to be revolutionary instigators (they were just 14 and 10 respectively when the Stamp Act was passed) but by the 1780s they had risen to prominent positions within the new nation. Both would contribute to the Revolutionary War, Madison as a state assemblyman and Hamilton as a soldier, and both would earn selection to the 1787 Philadelphia convention. Each would play a lead role in determining the political make-up of the new nation: Madison as a political philosopher and architect of the Constitution; Hamilton as a forceful advocate for centralised political and economic power. Both were nationalists, envisaging the great potential for the future United States; both were at the forefront of the Federalist movement.
James Madison was physically an unremarkable figure, barely 158 centimetres tall, pale-skinned and sickly looking, with a high-pitched voice that was often inaudible in public meetings and assemblies. He was quite anti-social, disliking company and crowds, though those with whom he did mix described him as an erudite conversationalist. Madison had entered the Virginia assembly in 1776 and proved something of a junior Thomas Jefferson. His hard work and attention to detail earned him considerable respect, despite his young age. Like many of his colleagues, Madison was alarmed at the social disorder permitted by the watery Articles of Confederation, so he eagerly accepted a nomination to attend Philadelphia. There he tabled his famous ‘Virginia Plan’ for a three-branch federal political system, combining existing ideas (such as the British political system and the separation of powers theorised by Montesquieu) with his own innovations, guided by his keen knowledge of political philosophy and his precise attention to detail. Though his model was subsequently amended by the convention, Madison would later earn the epithet ‘father of the Constitution’, though it was a title he spurned. And while he opposed the inclusion of specific individual rights into the Constitution, when this concession was made to the anti-Federalists Madison alone drafted the Bill of Rights. Madison later went on to become the fourth president of the United States between 1809-17.
Explanation:
Stare decisis maybe? sorry if wrong
