That was against the will of the people themselves, that very electoral college could work in the opposite direction you want, and then suddenly, it’s not so fine and dandy. Rampant democracy is a risk that only really happens when we place EVERYTHING up to the smallest majority, rather than requiring a high enough margin for SOME decisions, which is what I’m asking for, including the election of the president, since the people are the ones who should get to decide who the most powerful person on earth gets to be. Trump became a murderer, liar, and cheat once he got into office… Read more too, and the very electoral college you defend perpetuates that binary option that makes the system so gated from candidates you and I like, for you that’s Ron Paul, for me that’s Bernie sanders. Two parties make sure only a certain kind of person can even get attention at all, wouldn’t you want to get rid of a system that keeps that binary in place? The electoral college itself was a compromise between the 13 states, and the people. Power though, wasn’t vested in the states, it was vested in delegates who could change their votes at any moment, most often by simply bypassing some rules. A president who won the vote of the people could be thrown out the next month by a couple delegates changing their vote, and yet, the votes of the public haven’t changed, so it’s quite literally up to unelected bureaucrats, a group you tend to complain about, deciding who can be the most POWERFUL MAN ON EARTH. And yet, when it comes to bureaucrats, you’re mad about rules, not who’s in charge of the nuclear button. The electoral college is old, it’s overdone, it doesn’t even check democracy, it just destroys its own system itself, and then we parade it around as if it’s some beautiful system that ISN’T being viewed as ridiculous and useless by the rest of the planet. We’ve gotta let go by now, it’s been time for ages, and it’s failure rate is too high to consider ethical.
