I think a fairer, better solution would be somewhere in between: say, an electoral college made up of counties, not of states.
With the current system, a small number of swing states, and the same states every time, often determine the outcome of a presidential election. If you live in a "deep blue" or "bright red" state -- be it Mississippi or Massachusetts -- your vote is irrelevant. If you're a minority within your state (say, an African American in Mississippi or a conservative Republican in Massachusetts) your vote is not only irrelevant, it's also effectively uncounted. The Electoral College is also unproportional and therefore discriminatory -- the votes of people in rural, low-population, predominantly white states count for more than the votes of people in more diverse, urbanized, highly populated states.
However, if we dispensed with it entirely, I think the outcome would be depressingly predictable. It would be the end of "retail politics." No more handshakes, town halls, or pancake breakfasts. The entire thing would be fought on the airwaves. Positions would be determined by political consultants100%. The candidate with the most money and the slickest, nastiest adds would win. It's already pretty much that way anyway, but it'd be much, much more so.
I think an electoral system of counties -- one that would acknowledge and respect the difference between say, Manhattan and Pottstown, NY, would be more representational and would still reward politicians, at least a little, for going outside the Beltway and talking to real, actual people.
On the question of testing and accountability, I just have to respond briefly: This was done in the United States for about 70 years. Literacy tests were di riguer in the Jim Crow South, and they functioned to deny African Americans the vote. They were outlawed by the Civil Rights Amendment. Are you really advocating returning to that system??? I am also going to choose to believe that the line about "voting for people because of their color" was intended as less racist than it sounds.
Ideally, election results ARE a form of accountability. This is a basic principle of democracy. I think the real problem is that our media is so fragmented and biased. On the Left and the Right, people get their news from sources that affirm their existing beliefs, so when there's a problem, there's no consensus about whom to blame. Can't propose a solution to that offhand, though.