Good historical recount of what happened. Though the description of "the partly national, and partly federal model had become the deliberate sense of the convention" is an improper description of today's reality. The reality of democracy is a lot simpler.
The popular-vote wins elections for both the Executive and Legislative bodies. Period. No "historical compromise" is necessary.
I maintain that "history" makes for good reading, but as regards the Electoral College it shows how a country can remain so attached to history that it overlooks its most perverse dysfunctional but possible consequence. That is,
a fraudulent election.
The popular vote is the mainstay manner of electing our Executive and Legislative representatives.
Why is the US "hung-up" on a winner-take-all Electoral College,
which can either emphasize the winner's vote-margin or completely upend the popular-vote decision as happened on Nov. 8th? Are we genuflecting nostalgically to our history as a nation, forgetting entirely the notion that the popular-vote is the ONLY true indication of the voters' will?
Without understanding how damaging it can be to a
real democracy when, in such times as ours, the voting process can be manipulated so easily*?
Think of the number of Americans, especially amongst the poorest, who look upon this election as "stolen from them".
*Most countries in the EU allow only limited time for political advertizing, and it is always at the same time of day.