Originally Posted by Senator Hatrack
My comment referred to liberals because they are currently the most actively opposed to it. I know that there are conservatives who would like to get rid of too. Mrs. Clinton's loss in the Presidential election is what has motivated liberals to to push to get rid of it.
I challenge you on that. I think you said it because, in your view, "liberals" are inferior and dishonest. No need to apply a label to make the argument.

Originally Posted by Senator Hatrack
Show me a quote of Madison's that it was meant to protect against unqualified men from becoming our President.
I refer you to Federalist 68. The authorship is presumed to be Hamilton, with Madison an alternate possibility, but it is certain that he, at the time, approved of it. I say this based upon the report of the convention itself (although not a direct quote):
Quote
Mr. Madison: If it be a fundamental principle of free Govt. that the Legislative, Executive & Judiciary powers should be separately exercised, it is equally so that they be independently exercised. There is the same & perhaps greater reason why the Executive shd. be independent of the Legislature, than why the Judiciary should: A coalition of the two former powers would be more immediately & certainly dangerous to public liberty. It is essential then that the appointment of the Executive should either be drawn from some source, or held by some tenure, that will give him a free agency with regard to the Legislature. This could not be if he was to be appointable from time to time by the Legislature. It was not clear that an appointment in the 1st. instance even with an eligibility afterwards would not establish an improper connection between the two departments. Certain it was that the appointment would be attended with intrigues and contentions that ought not to be unnecessarily admitted. He was disposed for these reasons to refer the appointment to some other source. The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.
Moreover, he expressed misgivings about the Electoral College himself in this Letter to George Hays in 1823. What bothered him most, though, was the advent and influence of "factions" (parties) that distorted the will of the people, and the use of "winner take all" apportionment of Electors that resulted.