I attended Electoral College my freshmen year....

but their tuition was too high. lol

so I agree get rid of it. lmfao

on four occasions. And the only one of those in modern times was the 2000 election.

With that few number of instances, I don't see the need for a change.

As you said, there are drawbacks to both sides. And the complaints will come from the losing candidate no matter which party he or she is in.

I think you arrived at the wrong conclusion regarding Ohio and Florida as places where politicians spend a lot of time.  Actually, they do that because by and large those two States and a few others seem to be the only place where voters actually pay much attention to what they say and then vote accordingly.  Most States's voters don't give a shit what they say and who they are.... they only care about the label attached to them and then like robots, they pull the switch for repub, or dem.. just like somebody told them to do.

It's an anachronism.  But it's not a huge evil and, besides, it would take a Constitutional Amendment so it'll never happen.

Those chosen to cast their votes in the Electoral College are not bound by the results of the election.  They are free to cast a ballot for anyone they wish.  
This rarely happens because the parties choose electors from their most loyal members.  But it has happened.

Seems to work in all other democracy's.

Both electroal college and the senate needs reform neither represent proportionla represeantation. It is more like minority ruling the majority.

A minority ruling the majority was exactly what the framers wanted.  They were afraid of a tyrany of the majority.

I think what you are referring to is the rule that it takes 60 Senators to break a filibuster.
But this is just a Senate Rule, and not in the Constitution.  The Senate could change it, or eliminate the filibuster completely.

I was not referring to the filibuster rule, which was put in place long after the Framers were dead and buried.  I am referring to the Framers' conscious choice to give small states an equal representation in the Senate with large states as a way of avoiding a tyranny of the majority.  This was actually cited by them as a big reason for doing  this.

I think some states have laws (or perhaps HAD laws) requiring an elector vote for the candidate he was elected to elect *cough* wow, mouthful there.