Responding to John.
- Your first point is incorrect. The constitution says nothing about the voters electing electors; it says that the states get to decide on how electors are selected. Moreover, while many states have made rules on how the electors must vote, there is a very strong argument to be made that those rules are unconstitutional. The states get to determine how the electors are selected, but once that basis is determined the states have no further role.
- The same argument can be made for either side. There is no empirical or supported theoretical basis for determining that one side would be benefited unless one side were counting on a rule change after the fact. Changing the rules after the fact is always precarious, but if the rules were bad/unconstitutional in the first place then the remedy, while not entirely “fair”, is arguably better than the status quo.