RE: But, Hillary Won the Popular Vote!?!!@!@
I disagree. It is easy to corrupt specific supervisors of elections in specific counties and use them to jigger results to particular ends. In fact, it's incredibly easy. Now, that said, there is plenty of honesty in the process. But it doesn't take systemic fraud to throw a national election. A few thousand votes in certain precincts in certain counties is all it takes to flip a state from red to blue and vice versa.
Then there is the embedded inertia in government systems under no compunction to improve their methods, properly update their voter rolls, etc. It's a system rife for manipulation even without local corruption.
And that means the whole thing is suspect from both an incentive and mechanistic perspective.
Thinking about a national election as one big system and that it all balances out is the wrong way of looking at it.
"wrong way of looking at it" is a strong comment. And in an environment of societal mistrust, division and fearmongering let´s not put to much hope in any given system or commission to fix what goes too far beyond elections. In other words - if you look for improvement in the electoral system itself, this here might be a good starting point for ideas: http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/usa/280331?download=true
I didn't say I had faith that the commission would FIX anything. Only that it would help to continue red pilling those still under the illusion that the systems themselves aren't the problem.
Fixing the electoral system properly starts with putting the whole thing on the blockchain. Anything short of that is just whistling past the graveyard. Cryptos and their derivatives are going to make elections of the current form obsolete anyway.