>as they ignore the reason for the Electoral College's existence to begin with Yes, almost 90% of people debating the Electoral College neglect to mention it w

>as they ignore the reason for the Electoral College's existence to begin with Yes, almost 90% of people debating the Electoral College neglect to mention it was originally created as an alternative to citizens directly electing the president. It was never about giving citizens in Montana more power, it was about giving Montana more power. Thinking otherwise is hugely anachronistic. It wasn't even technologically possible at the time to take a nationwide popular vote. In 1789, 1.8% of America voted. Four colonies didn't even hold a popular vote. [1] In 1800, 10 of 16 states had electors selected by state legislatures. In 1824, Andrew Jackson lost despite having a plurality of the popular vote and the vote as it would be assigned today (electors voting by the state majority). [2] BTW, California gets 55 electoral college votes while South Dakota gets 3. South Dakota gets exactly as many senators as a state over 45 times as large. Further, your argument that the rest of the nation would be helpless in a fair fight with New York and California just doesn't hold up. You have to include the 10 largest states to reach a majority of America. Ironically, while you claim opponents of the electoral college overlook the "incredibly diverse Republic of States", your argument only holds up if you ignore any diversity between those ten states, and the people inside them. Can you honestly say that California, Texas, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Georgia, and Florida are significantly more homogenous than the rest of America? Furthermore, the electoral college does worse than nothing to protect local interests. America under the electoral college doesn't ensure every state gets counted. It ensures that swing states get counted. Are you really better off being counted as a member of a state that's gone red all but once since 1940, rather than as a person with an actual stake in the election? Opponents of the electoral college don't primarily take issue with the weighting of votes. We take issue with the incredibly toxic effect winner take all states has on politics and policies. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1788%E2%80%9389#Popular_vote_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_ele... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_College#Appointment_by_state_legislature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_Colleg...