We have never had an election decided by popular vote, it has always been the EC. To say that EC interfered with the election shows your ignorance of the Constitution.
This is precisely the kind of simplistic response I expect from you, Baldimo. In fact the EC's vote is directly dependent on and conditioned by the popular vote. The electors are robots, as an election it's a farce, because they're told how they have to vote, and that is based directly on the popular vote. 48 states and DC are "winner-take-all" states. Electors are supposed to vote for the winner of the popular vote. 30 states--that's 60%--mandate that by law.The Constitution is silent on how theyvote or how they're counted, but that's the way the system has evolved.
The problem lies in the fact that all states, hence all voters, are not equal. Some, in states with smaller populations, have a much more powerful vote than others, and to may, including me, that is a prima facie violation of our founding principle of equal rights under law. And whisker-thin margins, tens of thousands out of tens=of=millions, a fraction of a percent, in several states can swamp millions of votes in other states, under winnter-take-all, which aksi seens a ckear violation of equal rights. There are a fair number of wasy the Founding Fathers screwed up. This is another one. Not their fault. They were doing something never done before, and it's naive to think they'd hit everything right first time out of the box. As T, Jefferson said, they should have scrapped the Constitution every twenty five years and written a new one based on what theyd' learned in the interim. There's no good reason two centuries on for a voter in Montana to have two or three times as much political power as one in Californie (I've seen figures where people argue it's more like 6 to 1). That's not what this country is all about.