The EC was invoked to try to protect against pure democracy and the potential for tyranny it carries.
Even if it was (it wasn't) and even if that goal is a worthy one (it isn't), the College has done a pretty crap job of it, given 2016 and numerous other occasions. You might as well say "this seawall is designed to protect beach front from flooding, except when it rains at high tide".
I mean if you really want the election process of your country to be some sort of moral lesson about "not getting what you want" why not just put all the ballots in a hat and pick out a random one to be potus?
Okay? And this election is hardly the example you think it is. In fact, it demonstrates just the opposite. Trump COULDN'T have won just by running up the margins among these so-called deplorables. Trump appealed to several different groups of people in states as different as Mississippi, Utah and Pennsylvania. Everyone thinks of his supporters as monolithic, but they proved to be from several different areas of the country, city sizes, education levels and income levels. His message didn't just resonate with White people without a college degree. Or he would have lost.
Not sure what you're getting at with your quote or your hat analogy. I think it's pretty clear that Hillary Clinton needed to appeal to a lot more different types of people than winning huge percents of minority groups she's been telling horror stories about the GOP to, a SJW base and a few college-educated Whites who were pissed at their party.
