I believe mostly the increased occurrence of electoral and popular not matching up is causing an accelerated concern for its usefulness
IMO people don't really understand districts.
If a state has 200k people divided into 4 districts of 50k.
The state automatically gets 2 senators = 2 electorals.
Each district has 1 U.S. representative (in this scenario) = 4 electorals.
Total of 6 electoral votes available.
District 1 votes 30k for trump, 20k for hillary.
District 2 votes 30k for trump, 20k for hillary.
District 3 votes 30k for trump, 20k for hillary.
District 4 votes 0 for trump, 50k for hillary.
Total "popular" vote for that state 90k for trump, 110k for hillary.
But 3/4 of the districts voted for Trump.
Most states have "winner take all." Trump wins 3/4 districts = 6 electoral votes go to trump.
Some states have winner take all, apportioned, so trump gets 4.5, rounded to 5, and Hillary gets 1, or 4 and 2.
You are considered part of a represented district. Not a sovereign individual in a state only consisting of statewide boundaries, one among a mob of people. Let's say you're Rhode Island. Your mob is far smaller than the mob in California, or Arizona, or New York.
Without the electoral college bigger states make your votes pointless. The electoral college makes your states votes matter just as much as any other state.
The "increased occurrence of electoral and popular not matching up" is a bogus claim. It rarely happens. This is maybe the 5th, 6th time it has ever happened. Not enough occurrences to claim an "increase."
If you want to see an increase and blame anything, then blame the crap out of people breeding, increasing state populations and therefore the number of representatives and thereby electorals. Blame the retiree's living longer, becoming more conservative, and flooding the cities that were predominantly "liberal" as they retire.
As a side, why do you "really" think Obama's HUD wants to force "more affluent" neighborhoods to become more diversified? Force more low income and section 8 housing to be built in certain area codes?
Or support "sanctuary" cities that increase the population?
You really believe it's for the children and opportunity and racial lovey dovey?
Always a loophole. Helps to get around things like "gerrymandering."
But no, of course politicians don't do things like that, try and manipulate the political field in such a way to favor themselves.
Nope.
They're all altruistic and just want the best for you and it never even occurs to them how it will affect the bigger picture politically.
accelerated concern for its usefulness
Which should scare you.
If people don't see the value of the electoral college, then they don't understand it.
It actually helps make your vote matter, your representatives matter, and your community matter.