Actually there is a good argument for popular vote vs electoral college. Under the EC system, eleven battleground states get the most attention because they are swing states. The rest are ignored because one party dominates it. In states where one party dominates by 10 or more, very little effort or campaigning occurs. Rather the dominant states are used as fund raising sources to fight in the 11 swing states. One way is to decide delegates by Congressional districts like Maine and Nebraska. Win that district, you win the delegates.
Popular vote for president would be a problem. In a close race we'd have legal action galore demanding recount after recount in every state. It would take forever to declare a winner.
I don’t like the popular vote because you can get a Hitler winning.
also a big storm like the one headed to NYC could change the results of the election (or a huge snowstorm in MN, ID, and WY), (or a New england snow storm).
With the electoral college, both parties are forced to the middle.
“Actually there is a good argument for popular vote vs electoral college.”
Going with the popular vote would allow an administration to totally ignore the wishes of the electorate in all but the most populous states for the duration of the term(s). All of the “small” states would lose any sense of leveraging influence on the Executive, and would therefore be subservient to the wishes of only the high density states and their influence.
I believe it would be a terrible idea, especially for “middle America”.