What’s scary about a scenario where the winner of an election carried the states representing 60% of the population? States aren’t people and in a rational and fair system the number of states won would be meaningless as long as the majority of the country’s population supported the winner.
The truly perverse outcomes that the electoral college makes possible are when a plurality of voters in enough smaller states (which have disproportionate numbers of electors) throw the election to a winner who may have gotten the most states but didn’t even get anywhere near a majority. That’s happened before, but the mathematical possibilities for just how skewed it could theoretically get are absolutely absurd. If the most populous states representing just under half of the total EC votes all voted 100% for one candidate, and a bare plurality (not even a majority) of voters in the rest of the states voted for the other candidate, the winner could come into office with much less than 25% of the popular vote.
