If there is a strong enough popular support for taking more extreme actions, then there should be strong enough support to change the constitution the normal way.
For people who want the constitution changed, thats the dilemma they have to deal with. If they don't have enough support to do it the regular way, then maybe the more silly and extreme solutions aren't justified either.
The primary flaw in the constitution is that smaller states have disproportionate power (Senate and Electoral College) and will never give up or dilute this power.
Even worse, equal representation for each state in the Senate is literally the only part of the constitution that cannot be amended.
So even with overwhelming popular support there is an absolute barrier to reform.
Senatorial races were gerrymandered in the 19th century when they were converting territories into states. We are stuck with the results of those political battles forever.
The problem with the electoral college is not one with the constitution. The house of representatives could easily reapportion seats and expand it's size to be more in line with the populations of the states, and these readjust the electoral votes to be closer to the popular vote. But they don't. Why? Perhaps they give up more as individuals than they gain in doing so?
The Senate composition can be amended legally. It does require the consent of any state which would lose proportional representation, placing a strong practical hurdle but there is no absolute legal barring of that amendment.
