As you may know, the Electoral College consists of 538 electors, which is a even number. As said in "The defenseof the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing President," that even number can be a result of a tie in electoral votes, but is highly unlikely. But even then it is unfair to those who "like" the system, where as I oppose the votig system. Like everyone, I have my reasons;1) 'Electoral college is a disaster factor' 2)  Voters don't vote for the President, but the electors instead.

To begin with my first reason, that electoral college is disaster factor as said in ' The indefensible of the Electorial College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong' the system had a fiasco, as you may call it, back in the 2000 election was the biggest crisis in a centuary. Also in 1960, segregationist in Louisiana legislatures almost succeeded in replacing Democratic Electors whith electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy, so that the popular vote wouldn't have gone to Kennedy. What else has hepened in the 1960s? As you may or may not know, Vice President Richard Nixon, validated only his opponet's electors. With this, the Electoral College has flaws or loopholes making it a disaster factor.

As for my second reason, that the electorial collge is unfair to voters. Electors may not always be faithful to their party, as said in ' The indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defense of the system are wrong' electors could vote for another canidate if they refused to vote for their party's canidate. Meaning that if a voter votes for a certain elector to vote for a certain President, then their votes probably wouldn't count. Also, because of the winner-takes-all system, candidates do not spend time in states that the are aware that they have no chance of winning them over, but focusing on the 'swing' states. For example, in the 2000 campaign, 17 states didn't see canidates at all and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't see a single campaign ad. Candidates shouldn't just avoid states that they have no chance in, but take that chance.

Even though the Electoral College is unfair and a disaster factor, it also fair in the state department. Smaller states votes area as equal as a bigger states votes, and the electorial college requires a presidental candidate to have a trans-reagional appeal which makes sure that  a candidate doesn't just go to a ragion that he knows he will get votes from, but to others that will allow him to gain more voters.

So in conclusion to my knowledge, the  Electoral College voting system should be changed for so that the system wouldn't be disfuntional and unfair to voters. Which will make electing a president functional and fair to voters.