Opening event
Loading the latest details…
Two presidents in 20 years won without the popular vote — Wyoming voters have 68× the presidential influence of Californians. The National Popular Vote Compact is 209 of 270 electoral votes from activation. Two debaters, opposing sides — you score who makes the stronger case.
Monday, October 12, 2026 · 7:00 PM EDT
What's at stake
Abolishing the Electoral College shifts which voters campaigns need to win. Keeping it makes a structural minority veto in presidential elections permanent.
The Matchup
Debater: To be announced
Debater: To be announced
Join the debate
Record a 60-second video on either side, or make it in writing. The strongest cases get featured before the live debate.
“Every other major democracy with a directly elected executive uses a national popular vote. The US could adopt ranked-choice voting to handle third-party spoiler dynamics while achieving genuine majority legitimacy. The American system is the global outlier, not the model.”
“The Electoral College was designed partly to give slave states outsized influence by counting enslaved people as 3/5 of a person toward electoral votes. The winner-take-all allocation used by 48 states has no constitutional basis and was not intended by the founders — it was adopted state by state as a partisan strategy.”
“The Electoral College forces candidates to assemble broad geographic coalitions. A national popular vote would concentrate the entire election in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston, allowing candidates to ignore the 40 states they can't run up the score in — the opposite of the representation problem reformers claim to solve.”
“The 2000 and 2016 outcomes that offend reform advocates were legitimate under the rules both candidates competed under. Changing electoral rules in response to a disliked outcome is corrosive to the democratic norm that you play by the rules even when you lose — and signals that the rules should change whenever one side prevails.”
The Format
Standard SuperDebate: two people, cross-examination, moderated from start to finish.
4 min · PRO · opening case
4 min · CON questions PRO
4 min · CON · opening case
4 min · PRO questions CON
3 min · PRO
3 min · CON
3 min · PRO · final case
3 min · CON · final case
— · You pick the winner
Don't miss it
The debate happens live with real-time audience voting. Get one email right before we go live, with the watch link.
Premieres
Monday, October 12, 2026 · 7:00 PM EDT
Open debate runs on the people who show up. Tell us how you want to be part of it.
Structured debates on the ideas that matter most. You score who makes the stronger case.
Humanity uses 1.7 Earths yearly. Degrowth economists say rich nations must shrink; others say technology can decouple growth from harm. Can the planet survive endless growth — or is degrowth a recipe for poverty? Two debaters, opposing sides — you score who makes the stronger case.
Aging kills 100,000 people every day — more than cancer and war combined. Google's Calico has invested billions in life-extension research. Should we treat aging as a disease — or accept it as part of a meaningful life? Two debaters, opposing sides — you score who makes the stronger case.
The US has spent over $1 trillion on the drug war since 1971 — overdoses still hit 107,000 in 2023. Portugal decriminalized all drugs in 2001 and saw deaths plummet. Does legalization fix it — or abandon the most vulnerable? Two debaters, opposing sides — you score who makes the stronger case.
South Korea's birth rate hit 0.72 in 2023 — a record low. Japan and Hungary pay tens of thousands per child; birthrates keep falling. Is population collapse a civilizational crisis — or a feature of modernity and freedom? Two debaters, opposing sides — you score who makes the stronger case.
