I would like to see the Electoral College eliminated and have each and every vote count.  This would be the most fair way.  Because I live in a D controlled state, my vote doesn't count because I have voted R for the past several elections.

Maine and Nebraska have a much fairer method: electoral votes are alloted by district. Since each state's total number of electoral votes is the number of districts plus two (accounting for the fact that every state has two senators), the overall winner of the state popular vote gets those two electoral votes. While complete elimination of the Electoral College is also something to consider, that would require a Constitutional Amendment. Since the Republicans aren't proposing that, it could be construed that they are not confident they could win elections that way, and their desire for proportional votes could be construed as an attempt to win elections in the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote. This could come back to bite them in the long term; if the short game is all they can think of they may as well disband. What strikes me as ironic is that in 2009 the Nebraska GOP filed a petition to change to winner-take-all because President Obama won one of that state's electoral votes in the 2008 election.

"Democrats are outraged at the potential change". Why? MA Democrats voted to give all of MA's electoral votes to the national winner of the popular vote. And this new method for MA was endorsed by the Globe.

There is nothing fair about the electoral college.

In Alaska, there is one elector for 208,977 residents.  In California there is one elector per 627,253 residents.  Why should a vote in Alaska have THREE times more power than a vote in California?  In Massachusetts, we have one elector per about 500,000 residents. 

Why should I tolerate my vote counting less than another person's vote?

It would be nice if all votes counted. Voting in MA for a R is useless