Re: We're going forwards by going backwards
The electoral college needs some tightening up, but it's still better than a straight popular vote. The 9 or 10 largest cities in the country would be selecting the President with a popular vote and typically for the Democratic candidate as that's the party with most of the free stuff and lots of poor city dwellers live on those hand-outs. If the contest was a bit closer, it might take a few more large cities, but the vast majority of voters would be relieving themselves into the wind with their votes.
So far, the few unfaithful electors haven't compromised an election but every time there is some, it draws more attention to the loophole.
Both President Trump and Hillary Clinton admitted that they would have run their campaigns far differently if the election was based on a popular vote. I suspect that both of them would have been running circuits around those large cities and letting everywhere else go hang. The chances of even seeing a commercial on TV from one of them in North Dakota would have been next to zero.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
