What's wrong with the electoral college

I must blog twice today. As I was throwing out newspapers which piled up during my absence I found that the following people had visited Wilkes-Barre/Scranton during the week before the election: John and Cindy McCain, Caroline Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. Here's who visited before that: Everybody including Barack, Michelle, Sarah, Hillary and Joe (not the plumber). How many of those folks do you think came to visit Utah while I was there? Zip. Why? Because Utah doesn't count really. It was sure to vote Republican, so why would either candidate bother unless they could drum up some serious campaign funds? How many voters in states like Utah and Texas didn't vote because they already knew the outcome in their state? If we had a popular vote, then everybody's vote would be of equal importance and candidates would spend their time thinking about the needs of everyone and not just the needs of those who live in swing states. You gotta believe that even after the election, American presidents think more about the states and cities whose votes they might need for reelection than for those states in which they can't possibly succeed. With a popular vote, getting votes in Dallas, Texas would be just as important as getting votes in Dallas, PA. My vote shouldn't be more important than my daughter's in Prague or my daughter's in Austin but you wouldn't believe it from the amount of personal attention I got. So not fair.