text: Another key point, is that the number of votes coming from each state should be equal in the amount of votes. The author claims in Source 2: paragraph 10 that "If you lived in Texas for instance, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, you would vote for a slate of 34 electors pledged to Kerry. With popular vote you would not have to worry about all of the votes that each state gives from the Electoral College. Popular vote lets the people deside no the Electoral College deside. If two canidates were running for president and one was from Florida and the other one was from Alaska, their state could be the deciding factor which the one from Florida will win because it has more votes than Alaska which is not fair. Truly, the Electoral College should be replaced by popular vote because there is a winner-take-all system. The author shadows in Source 1: paragraph 7 that "Most states have a "winner-take-all' system that awards all electors to the winning presidential canidate. However, Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of "proportional representation." The thing is that with a popular vote system you would not have to worry about a winner-take-all and states that have a different system than the other states. Just let the people decide and everything will be easy and fair.