> Is that what we want?  To have an archaic system that simply
> does not work, and fails to reflect the needs and wants of a modern
> democracy?

It DOES work.

What does NOT work is:

 -- knowing that you have three or four swing states that you really need to
win in order to get elected;

 -- deciding that campaigning in your core states is a better idea... let
those swing state folks see you on TV and social media surrounded by your most
ardent supporters instead of actually visiting them;

 -- continuing to take those swing states for granted while your opponent
campaigns in them;

 -- realizing on election night that your broken campaign strategy crapped the
bed and you lost all those swing states to Donald Trump.

I still cannot believe that there are people who are so dumb that they
think the electoral college is why Clinton lost.  She only did any serious
post-primary campaigning in states that she was assured to win.  She
ignored, partially or completely, at least three of four swing states.  Trump
visited them all more often and won all four.

I think the US should have done what I did and take Hillary at face value
when she said she was retiring from the SoS job because she was "fatigued."
 I think she was too damn wore out to run a proper campaign.  Trump, who is
older than her, was not.

Mike

---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Energize! said Picard....and this pink bunny appeared...