You keep bringing up the Founders...

The Founders intended for the EC to have two portions. 2 votes per state. And a totally PROPORTIONAL population based component.

In 1929 that proportional part was forever changed. If we used the Founders’ (who you’re so fond of deferring to) math. California would have about 1260…

“Why shouldn’t more people outweigh fewer people? Why should rural votes count for more than urban votes?”

Because he’s a rural voter.
He will never say this, let alone admit it. But all rationalizations will stem from that thought.

(Also, brilliant flipping of the “little guy” angle. I’m stealing this.)

5 times. Adams. Hayes. Harrison. Gore and Clinton.

3 in the first hundred years.
None for 100+ years.
Then, 2 in the last 16 years.

I want someone to propose an electoral college of 436 instead 538.

Or we make the EC 2 per state + a uniform number of electors for population. 200,000 people = 1 elector. So, the EC would be much larger. And again, the small states would have disproportionate representation.

I like the second idea better. Mainly…

64% turnout in swings states in 2012
56% turnout in non-swing states in 2012.

An honest discussion doesn’t start: “So, we’ve done it this way for a while and that’s why it should never change. Now let’s have an honest discussion.”

1 CA elector represents over 500,000 people.

It’s not 1. It’s 2 of the last 5.

From founding until 2000 the winner of the popular vote lost 3 times. And not for over 100 years.
In the last 16 years it’s happened twice.

Maybe...just maybe, things are different than they were.

And I have yet to hear a good argument for the President not being based on the popular…