Joined by disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Al Gore is calling for an end to the Electoral College and the adoption of a system where total popular vote decides presidential outcomes.
Gore's contention is that the Electoral College disenfranchises voters who live in states that aren't battleground states: "I've seen how these states are written off and ignored, and people are effectively disenfranchised in the presidential race. And I really do think now is the time to change that." Of course, the point Gore and those who concur with him miss is that without the Electoral College, battleground states would not even exist.
In fact, without the Electoral College, persons desiring to be president would only have to win a majority of large American cities in order to win the election: thus they would not even bother campaigning in current swing states like Ohio and Michigan, nor would they spend campaign dollars in the what is largely referred to as "flyover country." Instead, all the focus would be on L.A., Chicago, New York City, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, etc. (And guess which party dominates national elections in the majority of those cities?)
Gore won the popular vote in 2000, but lost the Electoral College vote when Florida went for Bush. This happened because our Founding Fathers wisely gave us the Electoral College: without which states like Florida would make great retirement and vacation destinations, but they would have little say in the outcome of presidential elections.
Nevertheless, Gore and his comrades want the system to change so that America votes as a democracy: and they're carefully couching this argument with make-believe concern that voters in California, New York, New Jersey, etc., are being disenfranchised otherwise. Through this, they overlook the fact that America is a republic not a democracy.