There has been a good deal of talk about the unfairness of the 2016 Presidential election, and the irrelevance of the Electoral College. Before relegating the Electoral System to the ash heap of ancient history, take a minute to consider it in the light of a Bill in Congress, since the Electoral system is based on Congressional representation.
Each state gets one electoral vote for each member of Congress, and each Senator. The House is a proportional body based on state population, and the Senate is an equal body representing the States equally.
If each House member and each Senator voted for a given bill by the same breakdown as the 2016 election results, the bill would pass both Houses of Congress by significant margins.
Here is how it works. Clinton won 20 states, and Trump won 30. Subtract 2 from each state for the Senators, and you get a House vote of GOP- 246 to DEM-192. In the Senate, the vote would be GOP-60 DEM-40.
If a bill to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour were voted down by those margins, would that not show a clear defeat of the bill? If a measure in Congress passed by this same margin, would it not be a solid win? How then do people expect to sustain an argument that the Presidential election was somehow illegitimate and not a national mandate?
Those arguing for the abolition of the Electoral College in favor of strict popular vote are actually supporting a unicameral legislature with strict majority rule. The people of 30 states would be disenfranchised and sectarian conflicts would increase. This is why democracy does not work in large diverse populations. That is exactly what the founders knew and sought to avoid.
Of course this is merely an academic consideration since if there were no Electoral College both sides would have campaigned entirely differently. All their time would have been spent in California, New York, Texas, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio, Illinois, and Massachusetts. The major population centers in those eight states accounted for almost half the votes in the entire country. Predicting what would happen in a truly regional campaign is difficult. Fortunately we are protected from that eventuality by the Electoral College system. Which as it turned out again this time, gives us a fairly well rounded and balanced result when fifty separate elections are held and the results balanced proportionately.
Also, the claimed majority for Clinton in the 2016 popular vote is actually a myth. She got a plurality but not the majority of all votes (48%) as pointed out by Matt Vesta at Townhall.com.