The fact of the matter is that changing Article II Section 1 to allow for a popular vote would require a Constitutional Amendment. An amendment of this sort would be dead on arrival knowing that a vast majority of the states will lose its share of representational voting for POTUS.
An election strictly based on popular vote would concentrate all the electoral power in 11 or so of the most populous states, these in turn determined by the their most populated cities. The alienation of entire swaths of people make this scheme untenable.
I prefer apportioning electoral votes rather than the 'winner take all' rules in 48 states. I think this would more closely align electoral votes with the popular vote while maintaining the balance of power sought in the original construction of the provision. Each state has the power to enact this scheme without the need for a Constitutional Amendment.
An election strictly based on popular vote would concentrate all the electoral power in 11 or so of the most populous states, these in turn determined by the their most populated cities. The alienation of entire swaths of people make this scheme untenable.
I prefer apportioning electoral votes rather than the 'winner take all' rules in 48 states. I think this would more closely align electoral votes with the popular vote while maintaining the balance of power sought in the original construction of the provision. Each state has the power to enact this scheme without the need for a Constitutional Amendment.
