The electoral college is important as a part of the systems of checks and balances. Without it, the election would be decided by the most populated parts of the country, leaving the more sparsely populated areas unrepresented. Just as every state has two senators regardless of population while representatives based on population, the electoral college combines the two. Without the electoral college, the country would always elect a president based on the desires of New York and California. The voter turn out in the rest of the country would be even more dismal than it is and would result a situation that was similar to one of the reasons for the revolution in the first place, taxation without representation.
Popular vote is in fact represented by the electoral college as population does factor in to the number of electoral votes a state has:
Each State is allocated a number of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always 2) plus the number of its U.S. Representatives (which may change each decade according to the size of each State's population as determined in the Census).
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/electoralworks.htmThe wisdom of this is a testament to the consideration of the founders of our country, the form and function of the political system works, if only we had participants that were equal to the task. I would only suggest one change, an option to select a "none of the above" candidate which would have been appropriate especially this last election cycle.
To not vote abrogates our responsibility as a citizen. It neuters your arguments about the outcome.