You are correct in that the Framers thought that the electoral college would prevent a tyranny of the majority — a phenomena that is by all intents and purposes suppose to ward off oppressive political actions but that is exactly what is in place at this very moment. My original article uncovers the intersectionality of race and religion that comprise this tyrannical majority.
There is nothing malicious about reaching a fair majority consensus in the electorate. That in fact is how democracy should work. However, when a faction within the majority acts to simply destroy the minority sentiment and perspective altogether it is seen conspicuously as tyrannical.
The electoral college has been shown on this occasion to be ineffectual at preventing this sort of tyranny, especially when there already exists a functioning tyranny of government — having both houses of government controlled by either the democratic or republican party at any given time through various means and methods of voter suppression or fraud.
As a collective, our lack of participation in — and our lack of awareness of — a true functioning democracy makes this a moot argument. There is widespread disagreement of what a tyranny of a majority even looks like because of external factors that are not limited to but include self-interest and motivated ignorance.
There is too much to unpack here to be brief. The electoral college is not in the least a democratic feature of a so called democracy. When the the tyranny of the majority is being conflated with the will of the people — performed by electoral college vote and not by popular vote, then this becomes absurd circular reasoning. As a rhetorical device it takes on an opaque form of jargon. There is a clear distinction of the two concepts.
The validity of the electoral college votes and its representers is rarely questioned in Congress. It is predetermined by a census taken every ten years and made effective through the next ten years(currently the 2010 census is valid through 2020). This does not properly account for real-time population changes. As the population of any given state decreases, so too must their allotment of electoral votes and vice versa.
A tyranny of the majority is when the plurality in a given plural society is blatantly ignored, dissuaded or discouraged from voting, gerrymandered, taken for granted or not even considered in reaching a consensus on governance and representation. Now that’s tyranny!