EC would be dismantled after GOP loss of TX and FL

[South Dakota Democrat]

That's my prediction (based on current trends) of the whole case with Electoral College. After GOP candidates would be no longer able to win in Texas and/or Florida in presidential elections, they wouldn't be able to win federally, therefore Republicans will start to talk about a possibility of abolishing or reforming EC.

Texas is still red. Florida is trending red. By the time Texas flips, the entire Midwest except Illinois will be reliably red. The Northeast will be more competetive then.

The electoral college is absolutely necessary for this constitutional republic; it gives power to the individual states and guarantees that the president has a wide coalition. With a national popular vote, cheating and voter fraud would be drastically empowered. Some blue states are allowing non-citizens to vote and they have many dead people on voter rolls. The electoral college confines the effect of those unfair policies to only those areas and not the whole country. A national popular vote would also mean 140 million vote recounts, which would mean more fraud, more work for election workers, and more division and controversy.

The Democrats want the national popular vote because they are the ones who are struggling to build a winning coalition. The Democrats' plan of the national popular vote goes hand-in-hand with their plan to give more rights to illegal aliens (including voting). They just want more power and bigger government, they don't care about Americans.

Bull.
The main intent of the electoral college was to act as a safeguard against mob tyranny. Nowadays due to faithless electors being punished, it has no purpose and only puts power into a couple of swing states.

The electoral college makes a smoother process, preserves states' rights, requires a diverse coalition across the country, and it limits the power of voter fraud and misconduct. The national popular vote would embolden voter fraud and misconduct, give significant voting power to illegals in sanctuary states and cities (13% out of 22 million admit to voting, that's 3 million votes), and would result in nationwide recounts of 140+ million votes. Would you have wanted nationwide recounts in 1960, 1968, and 2000, perhaps going on for months?

I shall also point out the lies in your reply. You said that power is in the hands of a "couple of swing states." That is false and oversimplified. There are many swing states, swing states change, and they can swing dramatically. The parties' support in each state is dependant on the support of their policies. The safe states are not naturally safe; they are safe because a vast majority of the people in that state support a party's platform. West Virginia very quickly went from being a Dukakis state in 1988 to being one of the reddest states. This was because the Democrats alienated the blue collar workers, especially coal miners. The Democrats lost the South because they alienated the socially conservative Southern Democrats.

The original purpose was to give the states the power over who became president, requiring a broad coalition and not just one radical base. Democrats want to change the rules because they fail to win by the existing rules; that's all there is to it. The Democrats have pushed for illegals voting, ballot harvesting, later poll closing in their strongholds, and they use intimidation with groups like Antifa; that is why they want a national popular vote, it's all about power to themselves.

I will address only the bold, as the rest of your post is complete fantasy rubbish to validate your own bias--The reason the electoral college exists is because most states were rural when the constitution was drafted, and only a few states even held popular vote. How do you give say to states that don't hold a vote? The electoral college made perfect sense at the time but was obsolete after reconstruction, and personally (despite being a hardcore neocon in 2000) have never support the EC for that reason.

When you start your reply with an ad hominem argument, it takes away your credibility. You haven't done anything to try rebut my many points and perhaps I'm just wasting my time here.

Yeah, you are probably just wasting your time.  You should probably just leave.

[South Dakota Democrat]

That's my prediction (based on current trends) of the whole case with Electoral College. After GOP candidates would be no longer able to win in Texas and/or Florida in presidential elections, they wouldn't be able to win federally, therefore Republicans will start to talk about a possibility of abolishing or reforming EC.

Texas is still red. Florida is trending red. By the time Texas flips, the entire Midwest except Illinois will be reliably red. The Northeast will be more competetive then.

The electoral college is absolutely necessary for this constitutional republic; it gives power to the individual states and guarantees that the president has a wide coalition. With a national popular vote, cheating and voter fraud would be drastically empowered. Some blue states are allowing non-citizens to vote and they have many dead people on voter rolls. The electoral college confines the effect of those unfair policies to only those areas and not the whole country. A national popular vote would also mean 140 million vote recounts, which would mean more fraud, more work for election workers, and more division and controversy.

The Democrats want the national popular vote because they are the ones who are struggling to build a winning coalition. The Democrats' plan of the national popular vote goes hand-in-hand with their plan to give more rights to illegal aliens (including voting). They just want more power and bigger government, they don't care about Americans.

some red states are literally kicking people off voter rolls very conveniently in time for the election but you don't seem to be complaining about that!

They're only taking dead people off the voter rolls. Stop being dishonest. You're also in a way agreeing with my point that misconduct could affect an election, you're just looking in the wrong places for it.

You're an idiot.

[South Dakota Democrat]

That's my prediction (based on current trends) of the whole case with Electoral College. After GOP candidates would be no longer able to win in Texas and/or Florida in presidential elections, they wouldn't be able to win federally, therefore Republicans will start to talk about a possibility of abolishing or reforming EC.

Texas is still red. Florida is trending red. By the time Texas flips, the entire Midwest except Illinois will be reliably red. The Northeast will be more competetive then.

The electoral college is absolutely necessary for this constitutional republic; it gives power to the individual states and guarantees that the president has a wide coalition. With a national popular vote, cheating and voter fraud would be drastically empowered. Some blue states are allowing non-citizens to vote and they have many dead people on voter rolls. The electoral college confines the effect of those unfair policies to only those areas and not the whole country. A national popular vote would also mean 140 million vote recounts, which would mean more fraud, more work for election workers, and more division and controversy.

The Democrats want the national popular vote because they are the ones who are struggling to build a winning coalition. The Democrats' plan of the national popular vote goes hand-in-hand with their plan to give more rights to illegal aliens (including voting). They just want more power and bigger government, they don't care about Americans.

some red states are literally kicking people off voter rolls very conveniently in time for the election but you don't seem to be complaining about that!

They're only taking dead people off the voter rolls. Stop being dishonest. You're also in a way agreeing with my point that misconduct could affect an election, you're just looking in the wrong places for it.

You're an idiot.

That's a great argument; totally changed my mind.

The fact that you're either unaware of or are blatantly ignoring systemic voter suppression via taking people off the voter roles (looking at you, Brian Kemp) does in fact make you an idiot.