Q: What do you think of the Electoral College?

• It should be abolished - 4,236 (56%)
• It's imperfect but it works - 2,992 (40%)
• Huh? - 341 (5%)

Your comments:

"I always have felt that they should make our VOTE count, however I feel as though the Electoral College should stay in place. If we start ripping apart the Constitution where will we be? Besides, I heard on CNN this morning how long it would take if a national recount had to take place -- 1.5 years -- there is no reason for that. I want Vice President Gore to be President, and he so far has won the popular votes, but I don't believe we can nor should change to having no Electoral College. Some people vote to make sure somebody else doesn't get in, while others vote for whoever. People need to vote for who they want, not to stop somebody else from getting in. We don't always have a excellent set of choices to choose from, but we still need to voice our opinions in the voting booth and then let the ELECTORAL COLLEGE do the rest. Thanks for listening." Jenn, Naugatuck

"On your survey for the Electoral College you only offer negative choices. How about a column that says its fine the way it is?" F.M., Harwinton

Editor's Note: We thought "Imperfect but it works" was pretty positive. ;-)

"The Electoral College should not be abolished. Just because the outcome is not in the Democrats' favor does not mean that the Electoral College is flawed. The college was devised by our founding fathers to have each state, no matter the size, have equal representation based upon each states' popular vote. On the other hand, if you're too lazy to learn about your country's Constitution, or simply, do not know how the Electoral College works, then that does not mean it is imperfect, either. Accept it, it works!" F.S., New Haven

"Who has a better solution? Please don't say, 'Leave it to the POLITICIANS!' They could screw up a one-car funeral!" Jim, West Hartford

"I feel if we were to change from electorial to popular vote, there would be a greater chance of fixed elections and incorrect data." Jill, Barkhamsted

"Gore -- show some class and step down! Stop being a baby." B.P., Middletown

"This is the most biased survey you've had so far. What about a choice that thinks its OK just the way it was designed and should remain? More liberal manipulation no doubt. Please note that I am not a Republican, I voted for three Republicans and three Democrats last Tuesday based on the issues of the candidates. I just think that the media manipulation of this election was and remains deplorable." Charles, Waterbury

"I think a candidate should be elected based on popular vote, not by a bunch of people in each state. Some of these people never even show up on December 9th to cast their vote. Why bother with this system? Just look what it has done to the presidential election of 2000. Talk about a farce." M.E.L., Windsor Locks

"I think Gore is a sore loser. He's not demanding a recount in other close states because he already won them. Why rock that boat?! The Dems sure could use Ken Starr now! He could get to the bottom of this and keep things tied up for four more years. I think too many people are bellyaching and Gov. Bush deserves what he worked so hard and so honorably to get. The presidency! Gore's been hanging around Clinton too long. He'll do anything now, just to make it miserable for everyone. It won't be soon enough for me to see the Dems pack their bags and go. Bad enough Hilary made it, but Gore?! PLEASE!" Kathleen, New London

"I would hate to think that if someone runs for office and is considered "way too cute" or is able to use subliminal messages in their political ads to say "elect me," and wins the popular vote, (s)he could get elected if we get rid of the Electorial College. Any corrupt person could and probably would do anything to get elected for their own ill gotten gains. It may be a very antiquated system, but I think that you should have some sort of safe guard so that we aren't "governed" by a Hitler or a Stalin, who will make themselves dictator forever and throw this imperfect nation into the stone age. The election process, while not perfect, should be revamped as shown in this most recent election. Only the people can really make the difference in how it is repaired. Just be careful what you wish for. You may get more than what you bargained for." G.M.K., Waterbury

"What really is needed is to have the TV not show vote counts or comments until "ALL" votes are in. That is after Hawaii is done." A.M., Middlebury

"I think we should have the peoples' vote only." D.D.S., Norwalk

"Is the problem the Electoral College or the counting of votes? Maybe vote counting should be uniform so the electoral college can work." G.C., Shelton

"I think that it is necessary to have the Electoral College. Without it during the elections the candidates would only have to visit the larger more populated states and wouldn't necessarily bother to spend time with the smaller and less populated states. The electoral college never posed a problem until this particular situation came up between Gore and Bush. It will probably never happen again. There wasn't even a problem when they prematurely gave Florida to Gore, but now that there is discrepancy and it favors Bush, Gore is being a crybaby about it. Now all of the sudden the electoral college isn't any good. Al Gore needs a reality check." C.T., Waterbury

"Get rid of the Electoral College. the popular vote should be able to elect a president -- not 270 delegates who have special interests!" B.C., Wallingford

"I think that the time has come to allow all of the people of the country to have an equal say in the selection of the president. Every vote should count. I think however that politicians will never let this happen because the way it stands now they know which states they have to manipulate to get the totals they want. Without the Electoral College it leaves it wide open and the power goes out of their hands. Where do they focus their ads, speeches etc. Before we go to another third world country to insure that their election is democratic, lets give Americans that same right. Let it finally be as Lincoln said '... a nation of the people, by the people and for the people.'" Katie, Wethersfield

"I think it is unfortunate that opinions are being formed about the Electoral College in these circumstances. The Electoral College was designed to ensure that all states and their citizens had a voice in the election process, similar to the Senate and the House of Representatives in our Congress. I think this system is preferable to a straight popular vote for several reasons: practicality - with a popular vote, the problems in Florida would be found in counties all over the country. Voting irregularities and close contests are not restricted only to Florida. Fairness -- In this election, almost 60% of the votes were cast in twelve states. With a popular vote, some of the states and their populations would be effectively disenfranchised. Balance of power-Eliminating the Electoral College would weaken the system of checks and balances currently included in the Constitution." Daughter of the Founding Fathers, Ridgefield

"I believe that the problem only exist because of times we live in and the way we live, our values and the illusion that we are in charge of big government! The fact that the Constitution has kept this country from failing for over 200 years should be proof enough that the problem lies in what we the people have allowed this country to become! The old saying you can't see the forest from the trees! Just look! The simplicity is gone!" Old Glory, North Haven

"The liberals want to do away with the Electoral College because they know they can control Presidential elections simply by winning the big cities (which they already do). All this talk of Gore winning the popular vote masks the reality that Bush won 60% of the states. If the electoral college is abolished, the less populated states will never have a say in the process. Maybe that's why Mrs. Clinton came out for it yesterday. Knowing she couldn't win in 2004 with the electoral college in place." R.J.P., Waterford

"Fellow Citizens, as you slumber in your American dream, try to imagine a country in which the President of the United States is elected only by the largest population groupings. New York City, L.A., Chicago, Detroit, Miami, etc. Lets say that a very rich, well connected, heavily financed candidate runs on a platform of 'social equality where everyone should have what they want and it's OK if you don't want to work hard for it'. The candidate becomes an instant hero. Everyone is talking about the land of plenty and 'easy living'. The actual intentions of this candidate are not disclosed to the public. The 'mainstream media' love this candidate because the people are glued to their televisions and ratings are at an all-time high. Many people don't like the candidate. They are dispersed all across the vast reaches of America. The election results in a POPULAR LANDSLIDE win for the candidate. The party who is following this candidate's platform wins a majority in the House and Senate. Many people in the country are outraged by the election results but they are not heard because the television's voice is the loudest. High taxes result from enormous spending to give the people what they want. Federal litigation against 'evil corporations' result in massive unemployment. The government offers to save the people from the 'greedy private sector'. Taxes skyrocket from uncontrolled federal spending ... tobacco, computer software, and energy distribution become the first 'state owned corporations' ... go ahead, you finish the story. OUR CONSTITUTION EXISTS TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES FROM IT'S OWN GOVERNMENT. THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE IS A VITAL PART. EQUAL VOTER REPRESENTATION ACROSS THE LAND. Don't let your America dream turn into a nightmare." United States Citizen, Cheshire

"The Electoral College was instituted for the same reason as two senators from each state: to guarantee equal voice in government to all states. Although the electoral collage is not legally bound to vote with the popular vote, it does provide a check against emotional or fraudulent populous voting practices by populates regions of the country, if they were to occur. Direct popular vote, combined with the requirement that the winner must also carry a majority of the states by popular vote in each state, would constitutionally guarantee each state equal representation. Without a guarantee to each state in a general popular election we would set the stage for another nation wide civil catastrophe." B.K., Plainville

"I hate Politics!" Lucy, Storrs

"(Without trying to be sexist), whatever happened to 'One man, one vote?' If I recall correctly from high school, the Electoral College was set up because, 'The common man cannot make a decision of this importance' or something along those lines. If a politician said that today, he would be shunned." Lou, Wallingford

"I'm not even old enough to vote yet i still know that the Electoral College is completely whacked." Sarah, Farmington

"Can't believe we don't have a more accurate system in this day and age. The money spent on VARIOUS recounts could have been spent on touch screen voting. Much more accurate without confusion. Easier for seniors also." E.F., New Milford

"About the Electoral College... It gives states with lower populations some equality with states with the largest populations. It is interesting that when you look at how the country as a whole voted in this election, the vast majority of the country voted for Bush. Gore won mostly just the states with the largest cities, giving him the quote "popular vote", but nowhere near the majority of the country." Tom, Guilford

"The Electoral College may not be perfect, but it helps prevent the most populated states from controlling everything. Not sure I want CA, NY, FL and TX making all the decisions for CT." Dave, Oxford

"There needs to be an update done on the electoral process. Our founding fathers implemented this system as a democratic way of voting , but today it should be updated to work in our society of today." T.B., Groton

"They should do away with all electoral processes. All officiating jobs from the Presidency to the lowest paid job in local government should be advertised as employment opportunities when opening are about to be available. Qualified applicants should take a test and the best score gets the job. This way we eliminate having to wait for a vote if someone can't perform their job duties and can easily be replaced. Makes sense to me and a lot of other people who I have talked to. Time to quit wasting money on elections and recounts and more recounts when one of the two parties or even both refuse to grow up and act like kids. Are these the kind of people we want running our country?" Louis, Norwich

"Without the Electoral College a state like Connecticut would have no representation, because of our low population numbers. California would be deciding for the whole country. Many states that are vital to our diversity, but don't have a huge population, would be ignored, thus leading to fragmentation of the nation. Residents of the less populated states would feel that their vote didn't count. Because of the Electoral College states such as Montana, Wyoming even Connecticut have as much importance as California and Florida." C.M., Madison

"I believe that the people should be the deciding factor. Why bother to vote? Use the popular vote, not electoral." C.P., Norwalk

"It is a bad idea to abolish the Electoral College. There is no reason why a state with a small population should not have amount of influence as a state a large population. That's what the Founding Fathers had in mind when the Constitution was written." D.C., Meriden

"Electoral college should be abolished or at least more reflective of actual popular vote." R.S., Seymour

"Although, the Electoral College is imperfect it does allow our government to operate on a less fractured basis. Were the president to be elected strictly by a popular vote it is conceivable that a candidate could be elected with only, say, 20% of the vote should there be several candidates who are quite popular. This condition does happen in various countries today creating a fractured leadership that gives new meaning to "gridlock". If the electoral college should somehow be eliminated the best alternative would, in my opinion, be to follow the general election with a run-off election in short order in which the two top vote getters went head to head. Given the sorry state of participation in the electoral process in this country I believe that this would be worse than the perceived problems of the electoral college." A.G., New Britain

"Until I viewed the results of this election, I too would have agreed that a president should be elected by popular vote. The returns of this election have demonstrated that without the Electoral College, the heartland of America would have NO voice. On Thursday, 29 states had voted for Bush and 19 for Gore, with two undetermined. Why should the rural areas of the country be at the mercy of the opinions of the cities. There are different concerns for people who grow our food than for those who live in the cities and suburbs. Without the electoral college, 2/3 of the States can be out-voted by a minority of 1/3. I guess our founding fathers did know what they were doing!" Lisa, Columbia

"I always had a problem with the electoral process. I admit it works however, please, please! keep the lawyers away from it. If we ever change to popular vote, we must establish a minimum of 51% of the total vote. Thanks!" M.F.S., Fairfield

"The Electoral College is actually a leftover from before the times of modern communication. The only way for the country to know the results of a national election was to wait for the electors to show up in Washington weeks after the election. There is, however, something to be said for the fact that the college allows each state to maintain some value in the eyes of candidates. Going to purely a majority vote would cause candidates to focus only on the major metropolitan areas. Maybe a system where each state is worth 'two points' would work. In the event of a tie, we go with the popular vote. What really needs to happen is a constitutional overhaul of our federal elections system. All federal elections should shift to a six year system. Each presidential term to run six years. Same two term limit. Congress and senate all reelected every six years at the same time! No cutting the election into thirds with some members running every two years. Think of the millions, or billions of dollars that could be saved by reducing the national elections to only once every six years! Think of how much more actual work could be accomplished if a third of the federal government didn't have to worry about running for re-election every two years. Might there be the possibility of a congress or senate full of 'new' members? I suppose so, but maybe that would be preferable to what we have now. Members so secure in their position that partisanship is everything and the real needs and will of the constituents is nothing." B.T., Lisbon

"Our 8 electoral votes give the State of Connecticut much more weight in the selection of our President than the popular vote would. The popular vote would allow candidates to win election by campaigning in a select few states and ignoring others. I am sure Connecticut would fall in the "not important" category." S.K.W., New London

"The Electoral College balances the rights of the States in deciding the Presidential outcome and helps give rural areas a more equal voice with heavily populated urban environments. Ultimately this favors a more balanced and healthy perspective in the selection of presidential candidates based on the needs of all areas of the country. Moreover we are a still a Republic and we need to maintain the rights and power of the individual States." P.D.G., Wilton

"Without the Electoral College,a taxpaying carpenter in Utah would see more of his money go toward subsidizing a New Yorker's passage on public transport than it already does." F.W., Torrington

"We are no longer an agricultural community but cosmopolitan in that we travel all over the country. We should elect our national leaders by popular vote." P.F., New Britain

"The Electoral College should be abolished because it doesn't make any sense! What the government is saying is that the majority of the popular votes don't count. That's not right!" A.A., New Preston

"If it weren't for the Electoral College, we might just as well let the 18 states comprising the majority of the population elect the president. The electorial college system was established to, as best they could, insure people living urban and suburban localities would all enjoy equal representation. But for that matter, everything the Founders fought and died for is being discarded, so why not the Electoral College? Like the citizens of all the bygone civilizations, we think we have found a way to beat the lessons of history." Wildey, No Town

"I think we should keep the Electoral College. States with small populations need to have a voice in our democracy. To abolish will have policy determined by the more populated but not necessarily more educated areas." Marlene, Burlington

"If an extremely popular candidate from the Northeast were to be selected by either party, they could potentially carry the popular vote. Our country is comprised of 50 unique state governments. Each of them deserve to have a say in the selection of the presidency. Bush may not have the popular vote but the majority of the states are his." G.C., Moosup

"I feel that the Electoral College is very outdated. We are supposed to be a democracy--yet when we vote for a desired candidate for president, even if the desired person wins the popular vote, the person must also win the most Electoral votes or else they do not get into office. Why vote at all if the popular vote does not neccesarelly mean that our candidate will get into office? I also realize that if the Electoral College is abolished, some of our smaller states would not get equal representation in the election. However, if we were to use a simple average for every state in an election, then, say, 75% would be the same in Califorina as Rhode Island--all states would get equal representation, and the popular vote would still count, unlike the system in use today." H.A., New Britain

"I think the presidential candidate should have both the required 270 Electoral votes and the most Popular votes. If the candidate doesn't have both, the Election should be determined by Popular vote alone." K.S., Moosup

"Thank God for the Electoral College. With a race as close as this one instead of Florida going nuts it would be the WHOLE COUNTRY with this extra counting baloney. It would be 50 times worse. I would love to vote again. I think I would write in Mickey Mouse like the twenty people in Orlando did. At least HE would know when enough is enough. Here is an idea, whoever wins can let the other one have the Lincoln bedroom for the next four years, that way they can both live there." S.P., Canterbury

"This is the year 2000 and our country needs to upgrade its voting ways. If anything, the only ballot on paper should be absentee ballots. And if every vote counts, then lets have a system that counts accurately." S.G., Cromwell

"Without the Electoral vote, why would a candidate for office come to any small state? He would make all his promises to CA, NY, PA, FL and a few other high population states and the rest of us be dammed." R.A.M., Bridgeport

"If we are all equal, then why do the electoral people have a "better" vote? Our vote should count, it should have NO chance of being overridden by 'more important' people." Jules, Storrs

Previous survey results are available.