I should have clarified....42 out of 435 districts were competitive....in the presidential race (not the actual congressional race in that district).
We just re-districted in Kansas. The GOP control everything; but, infighting still screwed it up. It eventually went to court; and, our districts are as irregular as ever.
I can’t imagine what a mess redistricting would be, if it had national implications...it would never leave court.
My alternative? We could have the states vote for president. And by that I mean have the state legislatures vote for electors, in accordance with the un-ammended constitution.
Other than that option (impossible today), I’m fine with the current system. If I were looking to reform the electoral process, I would concentrate on voter ID and double voting. Fix that, and the rest falls into place.
That system was mainly used until 1820. South Carolina used it until 1860. All but seven states switched to the current prevalent winner take all method in 1824, which was a major fuster cluck election.
There is nothing constitutionally to prevent a state legislature from taking over the power to select presidential electors again. Personally, I don't think it would be a bad idea if they did. But there would be a huge outcry.
A presidential election brings out a lot of morons who otherwise wouldn't even bother to vote.
Anyway, I can understand your point of view being that you live in a relatively small homogeneous state. I hope you can understand mine living in the mirror opposite type of state.