Comments by "Luredreier" (@Luredreier) on "The Electoral College, explained" video.

0:28 Not quite. Most of us have some form of multi-party system where coalitions makes up a majority rather then individual parties, or perhaps they're even just the biggest plurality there and then. Also, the US isn't alone in having different political weight given to different voters in order to deal with issues. Honestly the electoral college isn't even the problem. How people are elected into it is. You can keep the electoral college and it higher representation to smaller states and still make the system fairer by electing people into it proportionally within each state. Republican voters in California and Democratic voters in Texas would then be represented. Likewise would the Democrats and Republicans in small states where each vote would still be worth more then in bigger states. But every state would in essence become a "swing state" way more often as they'd become one whenever a single representative to the electoral college would be at stake (If there's 10 representatives from a state and one party has 29,5% of the votes in polls then that would be a swing state for one seat because they'd be distributed proportionally rather then with a first past the post system) As a result every vote matters to the parties in question. You could even have multiple parties, each benefitting from or being penalized by the differences in representation between the states but without votes being worthless, with everyone actually mattering way more. Even in big states you'd need way less voters to flip a representative to the electoral college so even if their voters are still disadvantaged you would still get more representation for them then with the current system. We also use leveling seats here in Norway to mitigate some of that extra power that the smaller electoral circles in terms of population have in our system ensuring that parties that's severely underrepresented can has another way to get to get more representatives.
1