Brian, the framers were concerned our nation would tear itself apart as previous one-man-one-vote democracies had. This was an overriding concern. So they devise the EC/ Perfect? Hell no! Yet here we are more than 200 years later and the bread-and-circuses crowd hasn’t managed to destroy it.
Speaking of which, you wrote about IL being in trouble. Aren’t they in trouble precisely because of bread-and-circuses?
So in my view, you are being irresponsible. Why? it’s because you argue against the EC but don’t offer a solution. One that won’ result in our losing our shining city on the hill within a generation. Do you really posit you’re smarter than Madison, Jefferson, et al?
Look, I understand the existentialist angst because Hillary lost. I really do. But this was a problem the DNC brought upon its own head by torpedoing the candidate with a change agenda in accord with the mood of the people and for instead, nominating a candidate with so many faults she couldn’t defeat the fault that was Trump.
Fortunately, we’ve elected a President instead of a King. And it’s not an Imperial Presidency and thus, 90% of what he wants to do will require Congress. My point? It’s not the end of the world. And if nothing else, your anguish mirrors Republican anguish in 2008 when they too sensed an existential moment. Didn’t happen.
Ultimately, in devolving your argument to Wisconsin and less than 100k votes, you neglect to answer the point I raised, which is sans the EC, then the populations of Texas, New York, and California would decide all elections going forth. Is this really your best idea of our Republic?