This depends on ideals and opinions but from my point of view it is not a fair and democratic way of selecting the president due to the fact that the citizens of this country have no real say in who is president. Therefore it is not democratic. Fair? No because the electoral college Can have biases just like any other human and they are not the majority. This goes hand in hand with the democracy question. If I was to be democratic. The citizens should cancel out what the electoral college says.
Now I’m the side of the reasoning as to why the electoral college exists. It’s understandable. Everyone is not trustable enough to decide the fate of the country. Overall it is not fair and democratic.
<span>Devotion to God and loyalty to country
</span>
Answer: A. a disagreement between the states over representation in Congress.
The main disagreement was over whether representation would be the same for all states, or based on a state's population size. Then there was also a question, for basing representation on population size, about whether slaves counted in a state's population or not.
The Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise were worked out during the United States Constitutional Convention in 1787 in order to resolve these issues.
- The Great Compromise resolved a dispute between small population states and large population states. Initially, a unicameral (one-chamber) legislature was envisioned. The large population states wanted representation in Congress to be based on a state's population size. The smaller states feared this would lead to unchecked dominance by the big states; they wanted all states to receive the same amount of representation. The Great Compromise created a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature. Representation in the House of Representatives would be based on population. In the Senate, all states would have the same amount of representation, by two Senators.
- The Three-Fifths Compromise was a way of accounting (somewhat) for the population of slaves in states that permitted slavery. For taxation and representation purposes, the question was whether slaves should count in the population figures. (They were not considered voting citizens at that time.) The Three-Fifths Compromise said that three out of every five slaves could be counted when determining a state's population size for determining how many seats that state would receive in the House of Representatives.
Literally what the dude above me said
Bc it tells what the majority of the people want someone votes for who they think would be better and then they count the votes and whoever has the most wins.
