text: In addition, electors are United States citizens, and are entitled to their own vote based on the Constitution, while they are allotted their own vote, this gives opportunity for problems to arrise. Politics are very lowkey orders of buisness, and in 1960, the legislatures in Louisiana almost used the disaster factor to swing the election in their favor, by electing people who were more likley to vote for the opposer of John F. Kennedy, because they prefered the other canidate. According to source #3, paragraph 16, Posner addresses, "..each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nomie (and that trust is rarely betrayed". . . [; however,] it is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote." Since the electors can technically vote for whoever they desire, it can cause an unfair advantage to the electors sent who vote for the other candiate. The other factor tying in is that the voters feel as if their direct vote does not count. While it is true one vote cannot sway the election, it becomes apparent that canidates must have transregional appeal, meaning that they're favored in that region of the U.S. The canidates hold off on campaigning in states they already know they have dominated the votes in, because there is no one region that can elect a president. This makes voter feel inferior, and discourage them from "wasting" their time voting. If we use the majority of votes way to establish the new president, it is more likely that they will decide to vote once again, since they feel as if their opinion once again matters.