Bad idea. The founding fathers knew that the only leverage the smaller states would hold in the executive decision was through an 'electoral' structure which gave the combined efforts of 'several' states more 'power-per-person' in the delicate equation of 'separate and distinct' balance as per Federalist Papers #51.
Katherine Jenerette for U.S.Congress http://www.jenerette.org
This is the part of American history that few Americans grasp.
In the 1760s...there was a significant perception that big future-states and their populations might end up running America. The big states? Virginia, Penn, and NY. Several of the smaller future New England states had big issues about how a central government functions and how it would be fair. So this electoral college was the only way to ensure a balance.
There is also this idea that in this period, that you really didn’t know anyone beyond the state you lived in. The majority of Americans didn’t read newspapers and usually got news by word of mouth. The concept of a primary period wasn’t something that existed at that point...so you’d vote for a couple of guys from your state to meet in DC...and elect someone that they felt was “national”.
Looking at how this change things if we deleted the electoral college....you’d have to assume that five to ten of the big-states of the US...would eventually control the political process in America. If I could concentrate my funding strictly on NY and California...getting 80 percent of their vote, then I could forget about spending a penny in states like Alaska, Utah, Montana or Iowa. In fact...we could very well have a candidate who agrees to only visit 20 states during the election and telling the residents of the other 30 that I don’t really care what happens in your state, knowing I’ll get my 30 percent of the vote in each of those...thus turning this into a very different kind of election.
The possibility of a 3rd party guy coming out and winning in such an environment? I would suggest within three elections after you make this effective...a third-party guy would win. It makes this much simpler and cheaper for me to win such an election.