A counting of votes on election day IS a one-day opinion poll, Ron, and I believe it is normal to expect that the majority opinion of the voters would be confirmed at the end of that count, not denied by some elector for his own personal reasons.

It is not a great feature of your system that electors in some states are expected to vote as a bloc, it would be better if they voted proportionately, I think, to reflect the public vote in a realistic fashion...and it is even worse that they can be allowed in some states to contradict the majority opinion of the voters who just voted...if they feel like it.

I am not talking about responding to every damn opinion poll here, I'm not talking about bending every time the wind blows, I am talking about honoring an empirical election day result!

What the hell is an election even FOR if the people's votes don't count in some cases?

I'm saying that your whole system of electors is badly flawed, and that should be changed. It should be made unconstitutional for an elector to defy the will of the people he has been appointed to represent.

I'm also saying that Canada has some of the same problems. Namely, we don't have proportionate representation (which means that smaller parties are effectively rendered completely impotent)...nor do we have an instant runoff system of voting. As such, our system is badly flawed as well.

The people in power (who are the major parties) don't wish to see any of this changed, ever, because they are the primary benefactors of the system as it presently exists. Why would they change it?