>I'm merely suggesting an alternative fix that would accomplish about the same result (popular/electoral winner in sync) in a much easier manner. And, at the same time it would not shake-up the current relative extra weight of small states (especially in primaries, where it's perhaps most important to some of them).

Gotcha. Just wanted to make sure I understood where you were coming from. I haven't come to conclusions yet regarding the issue (not that my opinion will matter :-) ), I still need to find some time and resources to study it more. At this point I basically have 4 years. :-)

But it seems to me that at least part of the reason for the electoral college was the possibility that the electoral winner would not be the popular winner and that for the framers that was ok. Or did they wish/hope/think that the popular winner would always be the electoral winner? :-)