I didn't vote for Donald Trump and I have a fairly low opinion of those who did. I have a fairly low opinion of those who voted for Clinton also, but that's neither here nor there.
That said, there's something very wrong with people, primarily Democrats, who are calling for the Electoral College to be either (a) abolished altogether or failing that (b) subverted by subborning the electors to vote for someone other than to whom they are pledged. If you look at the map of electoral districts won by the major candidates (nobody else, not even Gary Johnson, won any) you'll see that Trump won "flyover country" and Clinton won the major metropolitan areas and almost nothing else for either. If each elector voted for the candidate that won the elector's district rather than the elector's state, it wouldn't have been 278-to-257. It would have been 460-to-75. Clinton's political career would have been over. If you're a Democrat and you hate the Electoral College, I think that might be why.
People are asserting that the purpose of the Electoral College is to prevent a demagogue taking over. No, the purpose of the Electoral College is to prevent cities taking over. It's working.
Let's talk about "Russian hacking" and its effect on the election. First, there's a difference between 'hacking' and 'leaking'. Hacking implies gaining illicit entry to a computer and damaging it or stealing information. If this happened, we don't know for sure who did it. Leaking implies giving information to someone who isn't otherwise privy to it. That did happen, no argument from anybody. Do we have evidence that the Russians stole data from DNC computers and leaked it via WikiLeaks? I haven't seen any, and if the FBI or CIA or NSA has such information, the President of the United States (to whom they all report) would have ordered them to make it public. He hasn't. What does that suggest to you? It suggests to me that such 'evidence' does not exist. Russia did not hack anybody's computer; Russia did not leak the DNC emails. If they did, it would already have found its way to the International Criminal Court — and it hasn't.
Well, somebody did. Who? Who had motive and opportunity? NSA certainly has and had all those emails. That's what they do for a living: collect data. CIA almost certainly has and had copies. It's NSA's job to supply CIA with information they need — and information they just want. Maybe CIA is as pissed off as the American Right at Secretary Clinton abandoning some of their 'assets' in Benghazi. It makes more sense that CIA is the leak than that Russia is the leak, but please continue to blame Putin. He's convenient if nothing else.
The thing that worries me the most, however, is the insistence by some that the electors should be 'briefed' on what the current administration 'believes' even if such belief has no basis in reality. If that happens and enough electors decide Hillary Clinton reallyreally deserves to be the next President regardless of the fact that the vast majority of electoral districts chose someone else, there's going to be a backlash from the group that is most able to lash back. Of the hundred million gun owners in this country, all but a tiny sliver live in red districts. Of the 350 million (est.) guns they own, almost none of them are in blue districts. Of the 800,000 police/sheriffs in this country, what percentage do you suppose would agree that Clinton should be chosen by the Electoral College on the basis of her winning all the big cities?
We could be looking down the barrel of the next civil war.
Sweet dreams, children.