I’ve seen lots of arguments for and against the Electoral College. Some are stronger than others.
But Stephen Sach’s idea that there could be such widespread fraud if we moved to a popular vote (rather than keeping fraud in a “cauterized” state) is ridiculous. Given the tens of millions of voters who would have to be involved in a scheme to swing a presidential election decided by a popular vote (or the entire state apparatus in a large state to move millions in the vote totals), there seems much LESS danger from fraud using a national popular vote than going after one swing state.
And more importantly, we do not see such election fraud on such a massive scale. Even NC09, the most egregious election crime we’ve seen in years, was both limited to a single congressional district and was uncovered.
Update: Sachs responds here.