Has the time come to abolish the Electoral College???

Similar arguments were discussed when they wrote the Constitution and the 12th Amendment back in the early 1800s (establishing the EC) . I know, I was there ;-) ...
Read the history and you will find that our forefathers had many of the same concerns (i.e. big states vs small states, states rights, large population centers effectively choosing the president, etc) . Granted the number of states were less than a third of what we have today, but the issues were relevant then; they are still relevant today.

After all, we are the United STATES of America; NOT the "Federal Republic of America".

The EC effectively was a compromise. Not perfect, but it was best agreement they could come up with. BTW, to change it would require amending the constitution or holding a constitutional convention. I doubt you would get the required number of states needed to abolish or change it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
http://uselectionatlas.org/INFORMATION/INFORMATION/electcollege_history.php

No, and here's why:
We do not have a "National Election" - we have 50 independent states that hold their independent elections for their choice of the President on the same day. Having an electoral college helps to reduce the likelihood of fraud by the representatives of each state, *but*, if one elector from each state went before Congress and reported their state's selection, the result would be the same... the person who wins the majority of votes in the majority of the states (usually) wins the office of President of the United States. In the most recent event, President Trump won 30 states, iirc.

If I could suggest *one* tweak to the electoral college, however, I would remove the "winner takes all" count that most states use for presenting their count to Congress... that's not representational. If each elector gave his / her vote based on the choice of each voting district in their state, the electoral college vote would be a far better representation of the constituents (and we'd hear far fewer cries from the losers and rejects about the system not working, and that their vote doesn't count).

But, it is what it is - the winner of the majority of the people in the majority of the states "usually" receives the majority of the electoral college votes. Each of the states should have an equal voice - California's vote shouldn't outweigh Rhode Island's vote.

However, I would be willing to accept the premise that the electoral college had outlived its usefulness, because of technology and the rapid return of information, *IF* everyone accepted that it was not a "national election", but was an election by each of the sovereign states on the same day, and having the superior number of the total of votes across the country doesn't mean anything if the majority of the people in the majority of the states aren't for the candidate who is predicted to win, or who has the most votes nation-wide.

If you got rid of the electoral college last year, Hillary would be your president now.

It was meant to solve a problem which has gone away. Now it takes away from the people's will. GET RID OF IT!!!!

Not unless you want four states to elect the President and the rest of us go to he!!.

Peter, the Electoral College is the instrument that gives each of the fifty United States an equal say in electing a President. Otherwise, Presidents would be elected by the few "most populated" states. At this time in history, there are nine states whose combined populations out-number all the other 41. They are California, Texas, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Georgia and Florida. Their populations are high enough to out-vote all the others. I prefer to keep the system we have in place now to give the rest of the U.S. population a say in every Presidential election.

Abraham Lincoln also lost the popular vote but won the electoral college. It was instituted so dense population centers could not dominate the rest of the country. Pretty smart of the founding fathers!

Yes, but not just the Electoral College, it's time to get rid of the entire tyrannical fraud the US has become since the Federal Reserve Act was passed. With that one act we reversed the entire meaning of America; every major precept the founders held for this nation was reversed and we now serve the very tyranny the founders fought to free us from.

The founders predicted this day would come which is why the penned the second amendment. Unfortunately we have come past the point of an effective violent revolution; however our technological evolution has provided us a better option, a revolution of irrelevance. Our money and effort would go much further eliminating the cause of war rather than fighting it; and make no mistake, the war we are fighting has been the same one that started in Crimea. We fight to protect money rather than mankind, money that is issued as nothing but our debt, something the founders forbade.

It's time to get back to the economic principles that the founders required, one where we produce value to trade on, not debt forced on others weaker than we.
https://1drv.ms/p/s!AoXPlyjz_r8dgUyQUT1f5PUmwvTK

Yes, past time.

No it isnt. You want a good example of why not? Look at NY state. I grew up there and hoped to settle down there after military service. That wont be happening. Why? NYC hold most of the population of NYS. The voted in so many messed up laws that help them but screwed up the rest of the state. The people in upstate dont have a voice anymore. Just looking at the map that LTC Curlee provided shows you that. I for one enlisted to "Support and defend the Constitution of the United States" not to chop it up when it doesnt fit my or anyone elses political view.