No, unlike MLB All-Star fan voting, we have a “one person, one vote” rule for electing the president. That’s obviously more fair! But take a closer look: also unlike MLB All-Star voting, not all votes for president tend to count equally. That’s very obviously worse.
Something you may not know: Harvard Law Professor and former presidential candidate Lawrence Lessig is suing the state of California. His argument? The state disenfranchised Republican voters in the 2016 general election because their votes did not count under the winner-take-all system.
Those who defend the current Presidential election system might argue that it is what the founders intended, i.e., a form of originalism. But nothing could be further from the truth. What the founders intended was never put into effect, and the current system bears even less resemblance to their principles.
By a wide margin, Americans want to elect their president by popular vote – not because such a system would favor Democrats (it would not) but because a popular vote would mean every person’s vote in every state would count the same.
States don't belong to parties, they belong to people – people who move, people whose lives are affected by changing economies – and the political leanings of the states where they live will continuously evolve as a result.