Senator, I think we should keep the Electoral College because, of certainty of outcome, everyone's president, and swing states.

An argument over the outcome of an EC vote is possible, for example, in the 2012 election, Obama recieved 61.7% of the electoral vote when only 51.3% popular votes cast for him and Romney. Almost all states award electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis, even a slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state. A tie in the nationwide electoral vote is possible due to the total number of votes-538-is an even number.

The EC requires a presidential candidate  to have trans-regional appeal. No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. A solid regional favorite, such as Romney was in the South, has no incentive to campaign heavily in those states, for he gains no electoral votes by increasing his plurality in states that he knows he will win. This is a wanted result because a candidate with only regional appeal is unlikely to be a successful president.

The winner-take-all method of awarding electoral vote induces the candidates to focus their campaign efforts on the toss-up states. Voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign knowing that they are going to decide the election.