LogFAQs > #887604471

Isn't this the exact sort of situation their existence was designed to protect against? Isn't this the reason why we actually go through with the process instead of just automatically declaring the person with the most Electoral numbers the winner?

That's my understanding, yes. But! The modern Electoral College isn't just a rubber stamp, it's expected to be a rubber stamp. I believe in some states it is actually against the law for electors to not vote for the candidate that won their state. We gutted its ability to serve as a safety net, but left it in place as a vote distorter. Can't honestly blame the last set of electors for that.

I mean, you want to argue we should abolish the Electoral College, I'm behind you all the way; its only remaining effect is to make votes more significant in some places than others, which does not strike me as a function worth preserving.

(Well, I guess that's not fair, it's not inconceivable that a third party could do well enough that no one wins a majority and Congress picks the winners. Although that's only happened once in 200+ years.)
---

I don't like this duchy. Now, it's an adventurer.