The Electoral College is known to be an important part of the electoral system. Many researchers have proven that it benefits our government and society in many ways. Just like any great idea, there are still many flaws. The original idea dates back to 1787, when the Constitutional Convention and its delegates were trying to find other ways to elect presidents. They turned to the Committee of Eleven for deferred matters, which later led to the creation of the Electoral College. However, many of the intentions of the Electoral College do not work in today's society and therefore do not work efficiently. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The intent of the Electoral College was originally to prevent majority rule. Researchers believe our founding fathers had a “deep aversion” to democracy and majority rule. For a time this worked. The system made it easier to elect presidents. The way it worked was, basically, whichever candidate had the most electoral votes would become president. The one with the second most votes would become vice president. Many critics believe that one of the advantages of having the Electoral College is that it gave a sense of protection to states that had small populations by preventing more populated states from dominating them. James Madison believed that the Electoral College would keep factions in check and maintain federalism and states' rights, thus promoting the idea of ​​maintaining the Electoral College. Another of the advantages of having an electoral college is that, according to many of the researchers' beliefs, it maintains the founder's beliefs to "secure the blessings of liberty." Some might even say it levels the political playing field a bit. John Adams once said, “Remember, democracy never lasts long. Soon it is wasted, exhausted and killed. There has never been a democracy that hasn't committed suicide." What this could mean is that nothing lasts forever. There may be times when some do not benefit from their decisions, but what matters is that it works. While it is true that the constituency maintains a sense of freedom, the flaws are still capable of outweighing the benefits. Many critics today believe that the electoral college no longer functions as it did in the past and therefore should be modified, if not abolished. A retired businessman and lifelong Republican, Roy T. Davis, once said in an article: “The fact is, it was developed 200 years ago and has a structure that was intended to appease the opposing forces at the time so that they could agree on other matters. That said, it doesn't matter how or why it is in place, it simply exists and we should seriously consider eliminating it and going to direct popular vote elections. “An example of how the Electoral College doesn't work well is during the 2016 election, Donald Trump lost the popular vote by about 3 million, yet he won the presidency by getting 304 electoral votes. This, from a certain point of view, does not is fair to voters who did not support Trump. Many critics believe that the Electoral College results do not represent the will of the people, thus ignoring the political interests of individual voters, thus demonstrating how inefficient the Electoral College is. Many individuals share this opinion stating that ultimately their grades do not end up in the national total, thus defeating the purpose of the “Gale Cengage Learning” grade, a house.