I just came across this essay and it certainly piqued my interest.
The Equal Protection Argument Against "Winner Take All' in the Electoral College
In 2000, Republican lawyers, desperately seeking a way to stop the recount in Florida, crafted a brilliant Equal Protection argument against the method by which the Florida courts were recounting votes. Before that election, no sane student of the Constitution would have thought that there was such a claim. When the claim was actually made, every sane lawyer (on Gore’s side at least) thought it was a sure loser. But by a vote of 7 to 2, the Supreme Court recognized the claim...
So, in a one person, one vote system, why should all electors in 48 of our states be granted to one person in a winner take all (WTA) pledge ? The...
...system for allocating electoral votes is not mandated by the Constitution. It is created by the states. And so that raises what should be an obvious and much more fiercely contested question—why isn’t WTA being challenged by the Democrats in this election?
If we had proportional representation voting by the electoral college, here’s what it would look like:
So now the question is, what do you think of this?