Trump lost by 2.8 million votes, but won by 3 million outside CA & NY

So, unless we want to be ruled by California and New York we should keep the system our founders devised to prevent such.

Clinton may have won the popular vote in NY and CA but she LOST the election because out of 3141 counties in the United States she lost 3084 and only won 57. Thus giving Trump a DECISIVE 306 to 232 Electoral College advantage. Said another way; there are 53 cities in America whose metro areas exceed 1 million in population. In 2016 Hillary Clinton won 47 of those 53 cities, a result that encompassed 154 million people, or 48 per cent of the population. However, she arrogantly decided to ignore the 52 per cent of the population that encompasses the rural vote and that rural vote beat her badly. These were the voters of flyover country that she saved her most vitriolic commentary for; arrogantly and divisively referring to them as bigots and deplorable human beings. In point of fact Clinton's loss in the 2016 election came down to the plight of Rust Belt voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan and Wisconsin that she ignored. What is amazing to me is that the 30 something geniuses who ran her failed 1.2 Billion Dollar campaign also managed to lose 194 of the 207 counties that voted for Obama either in 2008 or 2012. To the bitter end the narcissism and arrogance of the Czarina and her staff led them to believe that her much publicized and vaunted blue electoral wall would not be breached. Now they want to change the rules because ‘low information’ Americans had the impudence to watch FOX news and soundly rejected her campaign. They rewarded her barely concealed disgust for their deeply held values and dreams of a better life by supporting Trump. So what Podesta and Mook are really whining about is "... How dare the peasants think for themselves? We told them who to vote for..." You may laugh - but deep down in what would be considered a soul of a normal person the Czarina is still trying to figure that out.

Seriously......so if we discount two of the most populous states then our candidate wins. Is that really the arguement?