As mentioned below, it was intended to prevent exactly what happened in 2016.

It was a compromise between allowing congress to choose the chief executive or allowing direct election by the citizens which was all but unheard of at the time.

It was in NOT intended as a safeguard on the political power between large and small states. That was addressed by what was known as the Great Compromisea bicameral congress with one part based on population and the other where states are equally represented.

It is pure revisionist history to suggest the EC was installed by the founders to prevent large urban centers from dominating national politics. It is the definition of irony to suggest that a system designed to mitigate the political influence of a scattered, rural and uninformed citizenry now is now being championed as a mechanism to protect and even increase that influence.

There is also the regrettable but undeniable fact that the main appeal of the EC to many who implemented it was its expansion of political power based on the population of slaves. The south feared a direct popular vote because a large portion of the population was enslaved and of course couldnt vote. However, the infamous 3/5 compromise ensured the consideration of slaves in accounting for congressional representation and thus EC votesresulting in the slave states enjoying hyper-inflated power in choosing the chief executive.

Considering its tainted past and antiquated purpose it is absolutely time to abandon this malevolent institution. It will be difficult due to predictable but disingenouous opposition from those who have gained a vested interest in its existence through pure happenstancebut either by an Amendment or by individual state statute it must be discarded.
[Post edited by Hoocinogenic at 11/16/2020 10:24AM]