Presently, there are two States, Nebraska and Maine, that do not have a winner-take-all Electoral College structure when it comes to Presidential elections, but rather have structured their respective States under the congressional district method so that the winner of the popular vote gets two electoral votes, and the winner of each individual congressional district gets one electoral vote. This thus signifies that in these States, typically one’s individual vote matters more than it would in a winner-take-all State. Further to the point, if all States adopted the congressional district method, we wouldn’t have Presidential candidates exclusively spending all their time and money on so-called battleground States, but rather they would have to devote more of their time to States, previously taken for granted, because States would no longer be structured as winner-take-all.
The fly though in the ointment is the fact that many States have their congressional districts gerrymandered, so that the people’s vote is not really equal at all, because congressional districts are deliberately structured to favor one particular party over the other. However, there is a sensible workaround to this, which isn’t so much to eliminate gerrymandering and to provide fair congressional districts, not because that is a bad idea, but mainly because it just isn’t going to be enacted, because the powers that be aren’t going to allow it. Instead, each of the two major parties would have their fair say, by a meeting in which, for example, if there are six congressional districts, a coin is flipped and whichever party wins that flip thus creates the first congressional district subject to some sensible rules and conditions in that structuring of that district, which is thus followed by the other political party structuring the second and third congressional districts within that State, then the party that went first, would structured the fourth and fifth congressional districts, and finally the other party would simply have the sixth district. No doubt, these would still be gerrymandered congressional districts, but because each party has had its say, it would signify that the representation of those districts as a whole would more closely approximate the population makeup and desires of the main political parties of that State.
All of the above would make for a far more interesting election, because, as opposed to winner-take-all, there would be much more at risk, for in this structure, just about every State would basically be in play. Further to the point, this revamping of the Electoral College would more closely adhere to being in conformance with the popular vote, which makes sense, because it does seem weird and unfair that there are those occasions in which the winner of the popular vote is not elected President because they have lost the Electoral College vote. Thus, the implementation of this revised Electoral College vote system would make it so that more of the people and their respective votes would effectively have their say, which is good in a democratic voting system and a necessary improvement over what we have today.