No, that’s not how this works.

An argument we sometimes hear in favor of the Electoral College is that if we had a popular vote, each election would be decided by a handful of high-population states, and that wouldn’t be fair to the rest of the country.

No. The more-populous states would not decide an election with the popular vote. You’re describing what would happen if we tweaked the Electoral College so that each state’s number of votes reflected its actual percentage of the population.

We’re so used to seeing the Presidential election in terms of states, rather than people, we forget that there’s no state in which 100% of the voting population votes the same way. In each “blue state” there are plenty of folks who vote Republican and in each “red state” there are plenty of folks who vote for Democrats. The Electoral College makes it so those people’s votes don’t count. A popular-vote election would make it so that all of those votes would count.

I think the real complaint is that the more-populated states tend to vote more for Democrats, and that wouldn’t be fair to conservatives.

To which I say: this is my country just as much as yours. You have no moral right to having your vote count for more than mine.

Republicans are the party of voter suppression. Vote for Democrats in November.