Fortunately the Electoral College is covered in the Constitution and the 12th Amendment.
It would take a 2/3 majority of both the House and Senate or a constitutional convention of 2/3 of the state legislatures.
I don't know what Newt was thinking then... but he's changed his tune now.
Politicians... even the "good" ones, they sway any way the wind blows... so there probably aren't any good ones.

Unable to agree on any particular method for selecting presidential electors, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method exclusively to the states in Article II, Section 1
“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors….”
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."

The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes and the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in the country.

The bill is states with 270 electors replacing state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but later enacted by 48 states), in the enacting states, to guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire United States.

The bill retains the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections, and uses the built-in method that the Constitution provides for states to make changes. It ensures that every voter is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

Under National Popular Vote, every voter, in every state, for every candidate, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would matter equally in the state counts and national count.

I noted what Newt was thinking: “No one should become president of the United States without speaking to the needs and hopes of Americans in all 50 states. … America would be better served with a presidential election process that treated citizens across the country equally. The National Popular Vote bill accomplishes this in a manner consistent with the Constitution and with our fundamental democratic principles.”

If Hilary had won the election we'd all be wiping our servers with a cloth and wearing pantsuits.

Trump, October 12, 2017 in Sean Hannity interview
“I would rather have a popular vote. “

Trump, November 13, 2016, on “60 Minutes”
“ I would rather see it, where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes, and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win. There’s a reason for doing this. Because it brings all the states into play.”

In 2012, the night Romney lost, Trump tweeted.
"The phoney electoral college made a laughing stock out of our nation. . . . The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy."

@otto
So... Trump is not as wise as the Founding Fathers. I'm not especially surprised
I don't know that Trump has given the matter much thought... he might not be capable of giving it much thought. Seems to have an attention span problem.
I'll defend him when I think he's being attacked unfairly (or rather I'll defend fairness.) I won't defend him when he says something stupid. Which is kinda way too often.

I am disappointed that Newt used to support election by popular vote. He's changed his tune now... but I don't have a lot of respect for politicians that change their position with the wind.

I don't especially care what Newt thinks, Trump less so. I've read a little bit about the issue and formed my own opinion... I think the Founding Fathers got it right.

Sometimes cynicism is tantamount to realism.
When a large portion of the population has no problem calling people who disagree with them Nazis...
I suppose there are only a couple of things to believe about that. 1) They've been manipulated or 2) they're just kinda rotten people.
If it's the manipulation thing... are they even aware they're being manipulated? If so do they go along with it because they're promised a cornucopia of free stuff? Or do they just feel empowered being part of a mob?
And there is only one thing to think about the people that are doing the manipulating... they are douches of the first water.

@chuckpo
Hey, is Rat-Snack Ocasio a good name for a band?

@An_Ominous, The Rat-Snack-Brat-Pack. Ocasio makes me throw up a little in my mouth.

Its called 'CFR loves domestic propoganda" on YouTube of interested.

Thanks for the kind words. I'm all about the metaphors... often over-extended metaphors.
I like / tend to write creatively... analytically not so much.
I used to write a lot more poetry than anything else... now it's semi-political ramblings when I should be working on the novel.
I guess as with any writer, inspiration comes from different sources. Of late what moves me to lift the pen... is the media insulting my intelligence.
I don't know what my intelligence ever did to them, but they insult it on an almost daily basis.