Given a society of three wolves and two lambs, what’s for dinner?

Madison had his points about the “mob”; electors arguably have a vetting effect on the choice of individuals. But that’s as may be. The real beauty of the EC lies in the allocation of votes in a way that protects political interests in a federal, socially, religiously, racially, and economically diverse continental power.

The EC is not about discerning the “will of the American People.” It’s about making sure that political interest groups of disparate population density get sufficient attention to prevent the disgruntled from seceding. (We’ve seen that movie, and it does not end happily.) Most Americans live in cities. Therefore, a national popular vote for President weighs the allocation of Federal resources toward urban, high-population interests. That is not a stable political dynamic.

The need to adjust the competing interests of urban and rural, industrial and agricultural economic blocs should be obvious to anyone who thinks about how to govern so large and diverse a population. It was obvious to the Founders, but, somehow, it escapes even our most “intellectual” pols (that’d be you, Mayor Pete and Sen. Warren). The views of these phonies, who somehow try to identify low-density interests with slavery so as to make those interests seem unworthy of consideration, is distressingly unsophisticated at best, but more likely appallingly disingenuous.

If the NPV thing happens, candidates will identify the interests shared by a majority of people and pander their way to victory. There won’t be swing states, where pleasing a wide swath of interests is necessary for victory. Swing states are microcosms. People in them want what many people in other places want, too. Thus, Pennsylvania, it is said, has coastal Philadelphia on end end, Rust-belt Pittsburgh on the other, and Alabama in the middle. To carry that state, as Hillary learned, you have to appeal to many political interests. That’s a good thing. The NPV will make it necessary only to win the cities and rely on the majorities in other urban centers to make up for the lost farm vote.

At the end of the day, the thing that makes the EC work is the weighting, the minimum of three votes per state. Yes, there’s some arbitrariness there. Why are their two Dakotas? But then, why aren’t there four? Why is Rhode Island a state, or Delaware? The system works if it keeps the wolves from dining on lamb chops. That, and not whether one animal gets one vote, is the obvious test of our Constitution. Anyone who says otherwise is stupid or evil.