First, seed is right in his point about the effect of wiping out the electoral college in the US.

So long as you like NY, LA, Miami, Chicago, and Houston electing your next president exclusively, then ditching the electoral college is the way to go. I expect that very idea warms the hearts of people who like the policies on the coasts, but always remember this: in a democracy, you must always be willing to see the power you create in the hands of someone you disagree with. The primary fallacy of the Democrats is that Bush's failings are singular to him as an individual, ignoring the fact that they more generally represent what is possible in the role of the president. Having the "right" person, or being in temporary agreement with the views of some population, is a horrible reason to extend power.

But the article seed links to is even more troubling, as it points once again to the horrendous state of our journalist class.

Please, if you're going to report on political issues dealing with the electoral college, at least have the common fucking sense to know how it fucking works.

A simple read through Federalist Paper #68 should do. It is my fervent hope that the shame at such public idiocy will drive the reporter and the responsible editor from the profession forever. They have proven themselves wholly incapable of functioning in the one job they need to perform: writing down sentences that are as factual as possible, in a pleasing order.

They fail. To wit: "It's part of a push by a California-based advocacy group to get around the odd political math of the Electoral College and prevent a repeat of the messy 2000 presidential race."

Uh, no. The Electoral College has only one bit of math: each state is apportioned electors according to the number of senators for the state plus the number of representatives. The EC does not decide that number of representatives, so it is not responsible for the distribution of electors. The EC does not -- please, let's repeat this so it sinks in, it does not -- have any say in the allocation of the electors to the vote of the people.

Indeed, the whole "winner take all" system of elector allocation is not even Federally mandated. It is entirely a state-level decision. Know how I know? Maine and Nebraska don't work with winner-take-all elector allocation. Oh, yeah, and I know how to read.

Bag-O-Chips is just another idiot who wants to look like he's doing something without actually doing it. Nothing is holding the man back from saying "Know what, the whole winner-take-all system is screwy. Illinois is changing, no matter what anyone else does." You could then have a real argument about the merits and demerits of elector allocation. Otherwise, you're pandering.

We expect this of our politicians. We get the government we vote for. But journalists, who claim for themselves a status both unrecognized in law and clearly unearned in practice, are left to the whims of the market. Which is fine, save for the fact that it seems demand doesn't drop when the reporters prove themselves to be the intellectual equivalent of pudding.