“The Electoral College, in short, is organized on precisely the same principle as the United States Congress, and for precisely the same reason. Neither institution recognizes population alone as the exclusive measuring rod for democratic legitimacy... https://americanmind.org/essays/as-the-electoral-college-goes-so-goes-the-constitution/

Because the presidency is connected to the rest of the constitutional system, candidates must think about the unique structure of the nation they seek to lead. And because the states, whether small or large, are the principal presidential battlegrounds, candidates accommodate...

interests that might otherwise be ignored if the size of the popular vote were the only criterion for election. It is argued that, as the president represents ‘all the people,’ he ought to be elected by the people considered as a single national mass...

But that conclusion conveniently ignores the federated nature of the American republic. Campaigning in New Hampshire is very different from campaigning in California, and representing ‘all the people’ means representing them no less as Texans or New Yorkers than as citizens of...

an undifferentiated whole. Once the states are removed from the presidential election system, these important and celebrated features of political locale will lose much of their significance. Voters in the less populous states, indeed in any area that cannot be readily subsumed..

in a mass media market, will be of decidedly secondary importance to presidential candidates. As John F. Kennedy said in defending the Electoral College in the 1950s, changing the mode of presidential election affects not only presidential candidates...

but the whole solar system of our constitutional and political arrangements—in ways that are difficult to predict but unlikely to be beneficial. With a national plebiscite, the customary ties that bind state and local party units to national campaigns will necessarily dissolve.”