“BTW, the Framers thought most elections would end up in the House of Reps. In their view, the state electors served more as a nominating committee.”
Can you share a reference for this?
Start here, and I'll look among the embedded citations for the exact date and Framer's comments.
>>Mr. PINKNEY renewed his opposition to the mode, arguing 1. [FN8] that the electors will not have sufficient knowledge of the fittest men, & will be swayed by an attachment to the eminent men of their respective States. Hence 2dly. the dispersion of the votes would leave the appointment with the Senate, and as the President's reappointment will thus depend on the Senate he will be the mere creature of that body. 3. [FN8] He will combine with the Senate agst. the House of Representatives. 4. [FN8] This change in the mode of election was meant to get rid of the ineligibility of the President a second time, whereby he will become fixed for life under the auspices of the Senate.
>>Mr. RUTLIDGE was much opposed to the plan reported by the Committee. It would throw the whole power into the Senate. He was also against a re-eligibility. He moved to postpone the Report under consideration & take up the original plan of appointment by the Legislature, to wit. "He shall be elected by joint ballot by the Legislature to which election a majority of the votes of the members present shall be required: He shall hold his office during the term of seven years; but shall not be elected a second time."
>>Col. MASON admitted that there were objections to an appointment by the Legislature as originally planned. He had not yet made up his mind, but would state his objections to the mode proposed by the Committee. 1. [FN10] It puts the appointment in fact into the hands of the Senate, as it will rarely happen that a majority of the whole votes will fall on any one candidate: and as the Existing President will always be one of the 5 highest, his reappointment will of course depend on the Senate. 2. [FN10] Considering the powers of the President & those of the Senate, if a coalition should be established between these two branches, they will be able to subvert the Constitution-The great objection with him would be removed by depriving the Senate of the eventual election. He accordingly moved to strike out the words "if such number be a majority of that of the electors."
On the next day, September 6th, the Framers moved the election from the Senate to the House, where it remains today.
You are welcome.