The United States presidential election process is flawed because its main components have lost their fairness, importance and simplicity. The electoral college over represents the smaller states, with the winner of the popular vote able to lose the presidency in the electoral college. The cost of the election has become too high in recent years making it almost impossible for anyone other than the 2 major parties to have a chance at winning. The National Nominating Convention has also become a foregone conclusion, with its place only to be an entertaining show. However, in regards to finance, the ability to spend money during elections is deemed a constitutional right in the US, with an unlikely chance of amendment, high election costs are essentially set in stone. Therefore, the US election can be deemed a forgone conclusion with only the 2 major parties trading seats because the elections components keep them in power.
In the electoral college, not all votes are equal in value and the system requires reform. The electoral college over represents small population states, in 2008, on average a state was awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people. However, Wyoming had three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens, in this situation each Wyoming citizen vote is the same as 3 votes for citizens in other states. There is also the chance for faithless electors, where someone who was voted in to support the Democrats might instead vote for a Republican candidate. ECV’s are also unrepresentative because it is possible that the winner of the popular vote could lose in the electoral college vote, meaning the candidate with the most support won't become president, this was the case in the 2016 election in which Trump beat Hillary even with less votes. However, this system does preserve the voice of the small-population states. Wyoming has 183,305 people per ECV while California has 718,364 people per ECV (2020). This means that those with big entertainment centres and important cities that attract more people won't overpower the voices of the smaller states during elections. Therefore, the electoral college is an outdated system that needs reform because of its ability to over represent in some parts and under represent in others, overall, it’s an unrepresentative system.
Election finance limits access into the election, keeping the 2 major parties in control. Firstly, the cost of elections is too high and stops new parties competing. The Democratic Party raised $938 million in 2020 with over 13 million people having used American non-profit ‘ActBlue’ during the election, with an average contribution of $35 each ($455,000,000 total). A smaller, more local or community driven party will never be able to raise those sorts of funds and will never have a chance against the major parties, keeping them in control. Small parties could take state subsidies, but these don’t help smaller parties compete with major parties due to the $103 million spending cap that comes with it, as to stop too much taxpayer money being spent on parties, but this 103 million is nowhere close to the competitors. However, money is deemed as free speech and so the government limiting it too hard or going against donations would be unconstitutional, this was decided in Citizens United v. FEC (2010), and Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and so an amendment would be needed to make any significant change to election finance. Therefore, elections keep third parties from competing against the major parties because it costs too much and the money only goes to the major parties.
The National Nominating Convention is nothing more than a formality and show of party unity. The convention is a forgone conclusion because it makes few decisions that haven’t been made earlier in the election, like Joe Biden winning the Democratic nomination June 6th but ‘officially’ being nominated August 18th during the 2020 election. This diminishes their importance because the point of the convention is to ‘nominate’ hence the name, but the decisions are merely confirmed at the convention and they’re decided prior. The running mates for the candidates are announced prior to the event now as well. Additionally, those held when the party's nominating the current president for reelection can be devoid of any significance because all their convention comes down to is an acceptance speech in which people aren’t too interested in watching, this can be seen in the Republican 2020 event which had a 26% smaller viewership than their convention in 2016 due to them renominating Trump. However, many voters don’t tune into the election until the convention and make their choice based on it, this is because the presidential candidate must attend and accept their nomination, the Republican NNC pulled 23.8 million views and Democratic NNC pulled 24.6 million. If there is an odd brokered convention like in 2008, then it is essential to be done. Therefore, the national nominating convention has lost its place in the election because it only serves as a formality of confirmation of prior decisions.
Primaries and caucuses are unrepresentative of the typical voters in the US. They can influence the rest of the election but the earliest primaries and caucuses of Iowa and New Hampshire, are among the least representative, they rank fifth and second, respectively, on the smallest racial minority electorate at 8% and 6%, being made primarily of older white working-class farmers yet set the standard to come during the election because they’re the first to be done and publish their results. Additionally, other media are more important than caucuses, like televised debates because they have a higher, more casual audience, the Iowa caucus 2020 turnout was 26.5% while the 2020 televised debate pulled 76 million viewers, showing the higher interest in the debates. However, they are much more important than they used to be due to the McGovern-Fraser reforms (1968) but Biden did not win either in 2020 but won the final election, so the hardcore individuals who vote in the primaries and caucuses do not guarantee that the person who wins will become president. Therefore, primaries and caucuses are unrepresentative because only those who are the most engaged political activists will take part yet they have the chance to influence the rest of the election due to how early they are done.
In conclusion, the US election can be deemed a forgone conclusion with only the 2 major parties trading seats because the elections components keep them in power. The electoral college is an outdated system that needs reform because it is an unrepresentative system that doesn’t result in a fair winner, this can lead to division with the American people for years after the election. Also, elections keep third parties from competing against the major parties because it costs too much for them to compete on a level playing field and when given help by the government still don't even have a chance to win due to the sheer power of the funds put in by the major parties. The national nominating convention has lost its place in the election because it only serves as a formality nowadays as the decisions that used to be made during them are now done prior and merely confirmed at the convention. Primaries and caucuses are unrepresentative because only those who are the most engaged political activists will take part yet they have the chance to influence the rest of the election due to how early they are done. However, with election finance, money is deemed as free speech for election donations by organizations or individuals and so the government limiting it could be deemed unconstitutional and only an amendment could make any significant change to this imbalance. Therefore, the majority of the features of a presidential election have lost their importance, creating a need for reform to fix them otherwise the election will continue to be flawed and create polarized outcomes for the people.