A more appropriate way to think of our "electorial college" voting system

[ChoppinBroccoli]

7. It's Patently Unfair, But I See The Logic In It

As Howard Dean said back in 2004, without the Electoral College, no presidential candidate would ever bother to visit the small States. So in that way, I can see the logic behind the idea. It keeps people from sparsely populated States from essentially being ignored. However, the fact that it's even possible for a candidate with FEWER total votes to win makes it patently unfair. There needs to be a better system.

It's funny, because back in 2000 and 2004, when Republicans were afraid that their candidate would win the popular vote but lose the electoral vote, they were all on-board with the "abolish the Electoral College" idea. Even Drumpf himself said it was an unfair system.

Maybe we could tweak the system somehow to ensure that the winner of the popular vote has a distinct advantage. For example, give the winner of the popular vote a number of additional electoral votes. We could still have the 538 electoral votes doled out by the States, but then the popular vote winner would get, say, 50 additional electoral votes. I don't know, just spitballing here.

I do think the system needs to be overhauled, and I think a great way to start would be to wipe the slate clean and reallocate how many electoral votes each State actually SHOULD have based on population. I believe that a lot of red States have way too many electoral votes based on their population, and a lot of the more heavily populated States don't have enough electoral votes allotted to them. Get a new census done and then reallocate the votes so that each State's electoral totals more closely match their population.