No. This is completely backwards. The distribution of outsize power to smaller groups makes it far more easy for a conspiracy to be implemented, because the electoral college means candidates don't have to compete for about 80% of the electorate-they have to compete for not just undecided voters, but undecided voters in swing states. That's tyranny of a micro minority.

Why bother competing on the ideas that will win over the people when you know you've already got 200+ electoral votes in the bag? At this point, all you need to do to subvert the will of the people is corrupt the voting in a few key places. What if, (and this is obviously completely hypothetical) campaign promises and federal spending were directed primarily at voters from specifically and notoriously indecisive states in an attempt to curry favor, all the while states that had solid, safe political majorities were ignored?

You argue that the will of the people is preserved by an independent judiciary and state and local officials, and you're making this argument based on the 2020 election, but what if things shook out differently? How many officials would need to be on the take if only the close tally in one state decided who would reach the 270 vote threshold?