I think the whole US voting system especially with the electoral college complicates things more than needed. Also voting counts and the mail-in process is ineffective and theirs no consistent approach to dealing with this.
Electoral college is a system that allows popular vote in a particular state to prevail in that state. So, other bigger states can't hijack its voting results by dominating if only nationwide popular vote was counted. This way smaller states get their voices heard during the presidential elections. What would be the importance of Rhode Island and Delaware states in a system where there is no electoral college? Zero.
Please keep in mind that the USA stands for United State of America, meaning each state is its own thing and voluntarily joined the union. Nationwide popular vote would rob them of their identity whereas the electoral college preserves it. Tiny Rhode Island is legally equal to the giant states, California and Texas.
The practice of allocating two Senate seats for each state regardless of its landmass and population size is of the same nature.
By the way, the math for electoral vote is the following:
100 + 435 + 3 = 538
100 = the total number of Senate seats
435 = the total number of congressional seats
3 votes are given to the District of Columbia (Washington DC - the capital)
To win the presidential election the candidate must get at least 270 electoral votes.
Let's take Florida, Montana and DC:
Florida has 29 electoral votes which means it has 2 senators and 27 congressmen.
Montana has just 3 electoral votes, meaning 2 senators and only 1 congressman.
DC doesn't have senators/congressmen as it is not a state, but a chosen capital with its own population. DC is given the lowest number of electoral votes a state can have which is 3 (2 senators and 1 congressman).
Whatever party wins the popular vote in Florida, all 29 Florida electors must vote for that party in the US presidential elections.
Maine and Nebraska have a slightly different system.