The arguments for national popular vote -
Some made here - are as specious as they get.

Why?

How about this...

Renowned Constitutional scholar Erwin Chemerinsky was asked what would he fix if he could only fix one thing in the US Constitution. He replied: "If I could pick any reform in the Constitution, I would eliminate the electoral college".

But he also says he can't think of a way to get rid of the electoral college except by Constitutional amendment and that is nearly impossible. The states that benefit from the electoral college aren't going to vote to eliminate it.

When the Constitution was written the difference between the most populous and least populous states was bout 9 to 1. Now the difference between California and Wyoming is 68 to 1.

To protect the less populous states we've already got the 2 senators per state regardless of population. The electoral college was a mistake at the outset and was a compromise that helped get the slave states to sign on. It is undemocratic. The nation-wide election of POTUS should be by popular vote. Arguments for the electoral college are what is 'specious'.

Right now the minority rule system we've got is helping the Republicans, thus their "we're a Republic not a democracy" and the "electoral college was handed down by God" nonsense. If the situation was reversed and this skewed system was helping the democrats the Republicans would be screaming about getting rid of the electoral college.