Direct popular vote via the electoral college

[Sophie Scholl]

There were several reasons for the EC.  First, because the Founding Fathers wanted the president to be elected by the eminent men of their states, thus keeping the Trumps of the day out of power.  Second, because the smaller states fear domination by the larger states (Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina together had more than half the total population of the US in the 1790 census).  Third, because it allowed the slave states to count 3/5 of their slave population in the apportionment of the electoral votes.

Going by that reasoning, the first is a failure, the second is still relevant, and the third is no longer relevant.  Not exactly a glowing endorsement for keeping the system. 

This proposal seems to me to be a band-aid on the festering wound that is the EC in American politics.  It may work for a bit, but ultimately it isn't the solution that is needed.  The Founders and Framers were fallible and left open the ability to change, adapt, and update things for a reason.

[grumbler]

Going by that reasoning, the first is a failure, the second is still relevant, and the third is no longer relevant.  Not exactly a glowing endorsement for keeping the system. 

This proposal seems to me to be a band-aid on the festering wound that is the EC in American politics.  It may work for a bit, but ultimately it isn't the solution that is needed.  The Founders and Framers were fallible and left open the ability to change, adapt, and update things for a reason.

An amazing grasp of the obvious.  The logic of not at least applying the band-aid escapes me, though.

[DGuller]

The Founders and Framers were fallible and left open the ability to change, adapt, and update things for a reason.

Did they really?  I imagine that all constitutions technically have some mechanism for amendments, so it's a question of degree, but my impression is that the US Constitution is way too inflexible to being amended.  This is one of the reasons why our Supreme Court is so powerful: it became the de facto amendment mechanism for our Constitution, because the actual amendment mechanism is so inadequate for the task. 

When it comes to EC in particular, the amendment mechanism is especially flawed, because you need to permission of small states to make a change that would take away the disproportional political power of small states.  Sometimes systems just cannot be changed within a system, and that is especially true for inflexible systems.

[Valmy]

I wonder if one of the unintended consequences might be a massive hike in the "entry cost" for running for POTUS.

If the focus changes from states to appealing nationwide as a whole, that makes the nation-wide media gatekeepers even more important, and they'll be able to jack up their rates astronomically.  And the big-population cities will get all of the focus as well. And that could make campaign finance game even more insidious. 

Maybe. But in the day of the internet you don't need massive TV ad campaigns and big political rallies and the like to get your message out. You can reach everybody in the nation at any time for very little.

[Valmy]

There were several reasons for the EC.  First, because the Founding Fathers wanted the president to be elected by the eminent men of their states, thus keeping the Trumps of the day out of power.  Second, because the smaller states fear domination by the larger states (Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina together had more than half the total population of the US in the 1790 census).  Third, because it allowed the slave states to count 3/5 of their slave population in the apportionment of the electoral votes.

Going by that reasoning, the first is a failure, the second is still relevant, and the third is no longer relevant.  Not exactly a glowing endorsement for keeping the system. 

This proposal seems to me to be a band-aid on the festering wound that is the EC in American politics.  It may work for a bit, but ultimately it isn't the solution that is needed.  The Founders and Framers were fallible and left open the ability to change, adapt, and update things for a reason.

Well I disagree. This strikes me as exactly the sort of solution that is needed. The Constitution clearly leaves the EC up to the states.