The principle of the electoral college is great. The principle was simple: the state gets to vote. The majority of the people in the entire country do not decide who the president and vice-president will be. Popular votes do not decide the winner. The members of the electoral college who are supposed to represent the popular vote of the state get to vote for the winning candidates of the election in their state.
The electoral vote of each state depends on its population and its number of districts. Each state regardless of population gets 2 senators which is equivalent to 2 electoral votes. Each district in each state gets a congressional representative. Each congressman represents an electoral vote.
So as an example the state of California has 53 congressmen (districts) and 2 senators, which gives it 55 electoral votes.
Are the chosen representatives (electoral college) of each state obligated to vote for the winning candidate? NO! That is where the potential problem is. Some states created laws to circumvent that. But there is no need for circumvention. Just eliminate the electoral college representatives.
Let the states AUTOMATICALLY vote for the winning candidate using its allocated number of electoral votes.
No more human errors, biased or prejudiced electoral college representative votes. No amount of money can buy the votes of the electoral college because it no longer has picked and chosen members. The state represents itself. It is AUTOMATIC.
Popular Vote for President and Vice-President must never be enacted. The population in the USA is clustered. The population of the state of California as of 2018 is about 39 million. The bottom 22 states in the population chart as of 2018 only register about 37 million. So if you are a presidential candidate, and the election is based on popularity where would you put your campaign money?
The United States is a country OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people. To achieve this 100% each county (parish and borough) in the USA must have at least one vote. The popular vote of the counties in the state will determine the winner for that state, which will then determine the automatic vote of each state.
When it comes to local State election for state officials, Gov., Vice-Governor congressmen and Senator; here is another suggestion to think about. Forty eight (48) states in the U.S.A. have counties, while Louisiana and Alaska have functionally equivalent subdivisions called parishes and boroughs, respectively. Why not make it a popular vote by county and have each county carry a minimum of 1 vote or more depending on population of the county (1st 500,000 population gets 1 vote).
Take the state of Nevada as an example. There are 17 official divisions (16 counties and 1 county seat Carson City). The population of Nevada is 3,034,000 as of 2018 census. Clark county (where Las Vegas is located) has 2,204,079 people. If a candidate for governor is very popular in Clark county, he does not have to pay attention to the other counties to guaranty his victory. This has already happened in Nevada. Had the election been based on electoral votes by county, Clark county would have been allocated only 5 votes. This would have really forced the candidate for governor, vice-governor, congressmen and senators to take their campaign to the less densely populated areas. The needs of the population of those remote and less populated counties will be addressed and their votes will determine the political future of the state.
Do the politicians of Nevada really care as to what the future of Esmeralda County, NV will be? Do they really care for the educational system in that county? A county with practically no political clout. A county with a population of only 783 people? But if this county has at least one vote among the (proposed) 21 electoral votes for the local election, you bet the politicians will come knocking at the door.