How would you choose a President?

[jayem]

I find myself unable to agree. While Checks and Balances are good, even without an Electoral College, we still have a couple of checks on tyranny by the majority. First, we have the Constitution that protects "minorities." Beyond that, the Senate will still be apportioned as it always has -- 2 per state -- giving small states the power to make sure their interests are taken seriously.

This fear of tyranny by majority voting is as spurious and contrived an argument as I've ever heard. To my knowledge, every other elected official in this country--governors, Senators, House members, state legislators, county executives, city mayors, aldermen, and many judges--are all put in office by the direct vote of their constituents. Are these all examples of tyrannical majorities? The idea is preposterous. Voters have sometimes elected poor performers. But that's an error of judgement--not tyranny. The President's constituency is the entire population. And, just like all these other officials, s(he) should be elected directly by the entire voting population.