I am writing this article in response to one written yesterday and trying to address some of the statements mad on that seed/article. I looking to expand that discussion just a bit more with this article.
Actually The Electorial college is elected based on population already.
What is wrong with casting a single vote for our most-preferred candidate and the candidate with the most votes wins the election? When each voter casts a vote for a single candidate in which the candidate with the most votes wins, then the election procedure is called plurality rule. Many people in the United States think of plurality rule when they think about voting, because they cast a vote for a single candidate in many of the governmental elections, including the U.S. presidential election. But, the election for U.S. president is more complicated than plurality rule, as a candidate becomes the next president of the United States when he or she wins a majority, or 270 of the 538 electoral votes.
Each state is assigned a number of electoral votes according to its population. The number of electoral votes is set at 538. Each state receives one electoral vote for the number of members it has in the House of Representatives; this accounts for 435 of the 538 electoral votes. The number of representatives of a state is determined through apportionment which is a function of the U.S. Census population for the state. Each state receives one electoral vote for each of its members of the Senate; this accounts for 100 electoral votes, as each state has two senators. Finally, the District of Columbia has three electoral votes (as granted by the 23rd Amendment). In 48 of the 50 states and in the District of Columbia, the candidate who receives the most votes from its voters – the plurality winner – wins all of the electoral votes from that state. The two exceptions are Nebraska and Maine which do not use a winner-take-all system. Instead, these states allow for a split among the electoral votes according to the number of votes each candidate receives and how the votes are distributed.
Hence, the U.S. presidential election is (close) to 51 separate plurality elections in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The plurality winner of a state receives all of the electoral votes for that state. Although the U.S. presidential election is based on plurality rule, it is possible for a candidate to win the election, but not be the plurality winner of the popular election. This has occurred three times since 1872,
So in fact the larger population states get the most electorial votes already. History states that it came about (the electorial college) because the founding fathers felt that "the masses are asses" (Ben Franklin)and that they were not capable to elected the President thus the electoral college. Now I undrstand that times have changed but base on my research,I see no real advatage as a whole of this discussion to totally eliminate the Electorial College. Maybe ( and I don't have the answer) we should modify the Electorial College to keep up with the changes that have happen in the 250 years (more or less) that our founding fathers came up with the idea. It's like almost saying because it worked for my Greatgrandfather and my father it's got to work for me. Thats why the Constitution is meant to be a living document that is and can be for ever growing, changing and adjusting to the changes in our history and events in our country.