The Electoral College does not logically follow the normative concept of how a democratic system should function. It violates the principle of political equality, since presidential elections are not decided by the one-person one-vote principle. Since the national popular vote is irrelevant, both voters and candidates are assumed to base their campaign strategies around the existence of the Electoral College; any close race has candidates campaigning to maximize electoral votes by capturing coveted swing states, not to maximize national popular vote totals.
As a consequence of giving more per capita voting power to the less populated states, the Electoral College gives extra power to voters in those states. In practice, the winner-take-all manner of allocating a state's electors generally decreases the importance of minor parties.
The Electoral College discriminates geographically. Major candidates should have to pander appeal to everyone and not just voters in the so-called “swing” states. Living in Ohio or Florida shouldn’t increase the value of your vote but right now it does. Why should a Cincinnati resident’s vote count more than someone who lives across the river in Kentucky? Does it seem fair that the candidates are basically ignoring New York, California and Texas or nearly 30% of the population?
The Electoral College should be an expense we slash from the federal income statement.
"The United States is the *only* country that elects a politically powerful president via an electoral college and the only one in which a candidate can become president without having obtained the highest number of votes in the sole or final round of popular voting." —George C. Edwards, 2011