Calls by some to abolish the Electoral College continue to amaze me. They believe Hillary Clinton should have won the presidency by 2 — plus million votes. Given the nature of this past election, it seems reasonable to illustrate why the Electoral College makes sense.
To begin with, Hillary Clinton did indeed win the popular vote by 2 — plus million ballots. However, that number is misleading. It reflects the difference between the combined five million vote majority of just two states — California and New York — less the approximately three million total votes Trump won in the remaining states, thus netting the two million number some are so fond of quoting. In the popular vote scenario, a candidate need win only California and New York by huge majorities — as did Hillary Clinton — to secure the presidency. The combined votes of the remaining 48 states would count for nil. The popular vote approach allows two or three states to decide what’s good for the rest of us morons. I do not believe the Founding Fathers intended such to happen.
A presidential candidate must appeal to a broad conglomeration of individuals, many with vastly different and often conflicting ideas and opinions. The Electoral College method of electing a president assures that those disparate voices are heard and their votes counted. It is a time — tested system devised by wise and perceptive individuals who, like Alexander Hamilton, feared a “tyranny of the majority;” groups who impose their own views upon those who disagree.
Sam Lutton, Belleville