Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 US presidential election despite winning a majority of votes. The same thing happened to Al Gore in 2000. Many of Hillary Clinton’s disappointed followers are demanding that the electoral college be abolished, and Hillary has begun a press campaign for just that.
Shouldn’t “one person, one vote” prevail? Why do we let this antiquated system continue? In election after election, it seems as though the “fly-over” part of the country keeps foiling candidates hugely popular in NYC and LA. As explained in this short film, that is exactly what the electoral college is supposed to do: insure that heavily-populated regions of the country — whatever their political inclinations — are not able to disenfranchise and dominate geographic minorities in remote or less-densely populated states.
The system was deliberately designed to require candidates to consider the interests of the whole country, not just part of it, such that any candidate derisively dismissing a large part of the country as “deplorables” would lose. She just did.
That’s not a bug — it’s a feature.