In response to:

Electoral College

susan3031 Wrote: Nov 18, 2012 1:17 PM
Dividing more states’ electoral votes by congressional district winners would magnify the worst features of the Electoral College system. If the district approach were used nationally, it would be less fair and less accurately reflect the will of the people than the current system. In 2004, Bush won 50.7% of the popular vote, but 59% of the districts. Although Bush lost the national popular vote in 2000, he won 55% of the country's congressional districts. The district approach would not provide incentive for candidates to campaign in a particular state or focus the candidates' attention to issues of concern to the state. 88% of the nation's districts would be ignored if a district-level winner-take-all system was used nationally
The United States Constitution provides for an indirect election of the President. That is, you didn't vote for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney last week; you voted for electors pledged to vote for one or the other.

The 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (which superseded a large section of Article II, Section 1) suggests says that the ballots of the electors in the several states having marked their ballots for President and Vice President shall

"transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- the...