Well, off hand I can tell you that survey wouldn't even have consideration in any social research. There is of course the problem with its limited answers and inability to truly encompass the scope of the question. Also there is the fact that CNN held that survey and I believe it is an online survey. Those are never to be trusted because there are too many criteria needed in order to qualify to answer that poll. The first being able to have a computer and internet, actively going to CNN's website, and also being interested enough to answer a poll. Right there I can tell you that most of the respondents are of at least middle income, have at least some professional education, and more than likely are leaning toward Democrate. So the poll is a bit skewed simply on that level. Also the lack of a followup question and a margin of error brings that poll into alot of doubt.
As for the Electoral College, I do not believe it is serving the original intention of its creation. Originally it was put into place to protect government from the ignorant masses, which as cold as that sounds is a good idea. The idea was that educated individuals would be elected to vote on behalf of the people with the understanding that these educated people would have a grasp on the situation. The Electoral College no longer does that, instead a political party is elected to cast their vote. In truth the College is a formality and we all know which way it will vote before we're even told so. If Republicans take this state, the Republican nominee gets the votes and vice versa. That was not the original intent.
I think the Electoral College could still function as it does, but it simply does not. There is rarely a descension among the voters and there have been instances where their careers were threatened if they went against the party vote. Do I think it should be opened up to one person, one vote....not really. I know everyone has this idealistic vision of everyone gleefully casting their vote for the figure they believe will take the win but that is a bit naive on our part. I would rather see economists, generals, and ambassadors elected by the people to vote for a president. I'd rather see someone allowed to take a month of critical thought over the policies proposed and then allowed to make a secret vote for the person they believe best.
As for computerized voting, I do firmly believe in that. I hate how confusing this entire system can be in terms of where I'm supposed to vote, where I go, when they are open, and the window of time I have to do so. So either there is a declaration of a day off on an election day and we are all given notices in the mail regarding where we are to go and at what times we can go, or we are allowed to log on and make our selections.