It was setup to follow the states result of the popular vote. Like I mentioned the only control that was used is the expectant that the electorals would follow the popular vote. Nothing else was used to ensure that the process was followed.

https://www.fairvote.org/faithless_elector_state_laws
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/10/21/can-the-electoral-college-be-subverted-by-faithless-electors/
https://history.house.gov/Institution/Electoral-College/Electoral-College/
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-xii
https://www.history.com/news/electors-chosen-electoral-college

You're one of those uneducated maroons who think our Constitution is alive and must change with the political winds, that it can be altered by political whim.

The Constitution of the United States is the foundation of our system of governance. Like the foundation of a building, the principles of governance embedded in the constitution are not subject to "remodeling" to accommodate any given time or age. What you are suggesting is to wipe out Article II of the constitution and thereby destroying the foundation of our system of governance.

What happens when you destroy the foundation of a building?

The Electoral College is critical to our election process, it prevents states with large populations from controlling the way in which our nation is governed.



The US Constitution provides the state legislatures with the sole authority of determining the time, place and manner for holding elections in their state. The constitutions of each state specify the time, place, and manner for the election process, and in all cases, a time is set ON ELECTION DAY when the polls will close and all ballots must be received. Ballots not received by the set time are rendered invalid and will not be counted.

One example of fraud is the violations of state election laws such as the Omar campaign ballot harvesting now under investigation by police in Minnesota during which money was exchanged (videos available).

Other examples of "new rules" include voter registration on election day that allows someone to vote immediately with no time for election officials to verify the information provided. In many precincts, no ID is required. (a bus load of illegal immigrants could walk in to a polling place, sign up and vote before the ink dries.)

Apart from those, the corruption of the election process in PA is probably the most egregious.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court threw out part of the election law passed by the lawmakers of Pennsylvania, and substituted instead rules written by judges. This decision, issued on a party-line vote by the elected Democrats who constitute the Pennsylvania court’s majority, used the open-ended guarantees of “free and equal” elections and “free exercise of the right of suffrage” to invalidate the legislature’s deadline for mail-in ballots to be received by 8 p.m. on Election Day — the same time the in-person polls close. Worse, defying basic principles of interpreting statutes, the Pennsylvania court not only rejected the deadline, but disregarded the explicit instruction by the Pennsylvania legislature — in Act 77, a law signed by the state’s Democratic governor in 2019 — that if any part of the carefully crafted bipartisan compromise was invalidated, the entire thing (including its provisions for mail-in voting) had to be invalidated.

IOW, the PASC violated the state election process and extended the deadline to a week after the deadline established by the state legislature.

These examples are by no means the sum of it.

There is no way the former democrat party could have won much of anything, especially the presidency, without corrupting our American electoral processes, without fraud and cheating. The mail-in ballot was the poison poured into the system.

This is not a conspiracy theory, or a right wing pipe dream, or just someone's opinion, the attempts to corrupt the American electoral process and disenfranchise millions of voters in this election was and still is very real.

Attempts to establish one party rule is nothing new, it has many historical precedents that were successful.