Keeping The Electoral College, Or Not

THE OFT MALIGNED electoral colleges has been much more maligned than usual since the election which elevated Donald J. Trump to the presidency only because of it. The modern maligning has been and still is, understandably and unsurprisingly, precipitated largely by sore loser liberals. Conservatives and Trump supporters, also understandably, either support the institution or are silent on the matter. They are currently quite content with the peculiar institution, dating back to the election of 2000, when George Bush the second was elected because of the electoral college, the Supreme court, or both, take your pick. Strictly vote countingly numerically, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton should both have become president, had the popular will prevailed, which in America it seldom does. We are a Republic, not a democracy, just the way the framers intended. We are a nation made by Madison wherein we the common masses are duly represented and governed by our elite wealthy superiors, again according to plan, for our own good. In Madison's day our elite wealthy superiors consisted of the landed white male gentry. Today, we allow the corporate oligarchy to do the heavy lifting on our alleged behalf. Madison, never one to trust the less socially prominent, doubtless would have approved of our present day penchant for corporate governmental oligarchy translated into government, and its insistence on supplanting democracy, which requires economic equality to function properly. hence, the world has never actually known a democracy, but only an ameliorated form of it, of one type or another. The electoral college places yet another buffer between the people and political power by giving elected legislators one final chance to overturn the popular vote, just in case they happen to elect an unacceptable demagogue. Since we recently did the demagogue thing, and since the electoral college and not the people chose said unacceptable demagogue, the electoral college may be said to have done the exact opposite of its intended purpose, an argument in favor of throwing it out. Madison stood five foot four, dressed in all black attire, especially on Sundays, and was unaffectionately known as "Little Jemmy". He was a serious man, and place us in categories. In his arbitrary bifurcation of the body politic there ware "the better sort" and "the lesser sort". The well to do, and everybody else. And so it remains today, less formally attired, yet, quite extant. We Americans are a conservative people by nature. Who are we to buck tradition? Hell, we can barely stand even the thought of improving the constitution, let alone are basic electoral system, or, perish the thought, our purposefully unequal social, political, and economic system. Scrapping the creaky, outdated old constitution and replacing it with a new and improved version, suitable for our times and circumstances, as both Madison and Jefferson envisioned, seems quite beyond the realm of possibility. Most likely we are stuck with the antiquated, aristocratic electoral college, at least for the foreseeable future. There has long been, and still is, a false rumor afloat that the college of electors somehow levels the playing field for the small states, giving them equal representation. Even a cursory examination of the math reveals that quite the opposite is true. Under the current system, Wyoming gets three electoral votes, and California gets many multiples of ten as many. how does this achieve small state large state parity? By going to a one vote per person paradigm, and leaving it at that, and simply adding up all the votes, one has the same electoral impact, whether one lives in Wyoming or California. but in the United States of america, equality is the very last thing on our minds.