I like the electoral college, but it needs a drastic change.
I would advocate that since there are one elector for each member of congress, it should be set up like this: One electoral vote for each congressional district, and two electors at-large for each state.
The idea of having "winner take all" for states cheapens the votes of the people, is conducive to corruption, and often skews the results. As an example, if this method had been in effect for the past half century, it is likely that JFK would have lost, and every subsequent presidential election would have been affected somewhat....Most importantly the 2000 election, in which the Florida fiasco would never have occurred, thereby depriving the Dems with one of their favorite talking points....
In the early years, this formula was used by 19 states. It was after Jackson's presidency, when the current two-party system settled in, that the winner-take-all approach became universal.
I should note that Maine and Nebraska use this formula today, although that reform is fairly recent.
And I agree with you, and have agreed since 1968 when I first heard about that little bit of early American history.