I only have time to respond to a couple of your proposals, and I won't even get into the fact that many would require a Constitutional amendment to enact:
—in some way eliminate or reduce the effect of the electoral college so there are more than 12 swing states - Of course it would be MUCH better to have the Presidential Election decided by five states, seriously without the Electoral College CA, NY, NJ, IL and FL would dominate the election. Tough luck if you live in Montana, Wyoming or Delaware.
--abolish the fucking Senate, honestly; it’s an outdated House of Lords - See above, it also helps prevent the more populous states from dominating the less populous ones. I personally believe one of our bigger mistakes was making Senator an elected position instead of them being appointed by the state governments as was originally done, that kept more power where it belongs, in the hands of the state governments who are closer to, and therefore more under the control of, the people.
—Have the president declare Marbury v. Madison was wrongly decided - Look up separation of powers, the President has no such authority. And without such protections, how do we undo laws which run afoul of the Constitution? Suppose Congress were to pass, and the President were to sign, a law that's in clear violation of the Constitution. Let's say something like "All news outlet must have approval of information by Federally appointed advisors prior to publication, any information deemed unacceptable by such advisors is prohibited from publication." A clear violation of the First Amendment, but now the law of the land. How does it get overturned absent Marbury v. Madison?
—Congress must approve the use of all combat troops and cannot deploy those troops for an indefinite period of time - Already done. We haven't had a formal declaration of war since the unpleasantness of the early-mid 1940s, but any time combat troops have been deployed overseas since then has been authorized by Congress.
—move away from schools being funded by property taxes so as to integrate society and stop, or at least mitigate, racial conflict - And how do you propose they be funded? Income taxes? So of course the places with higher incomes (therefore higher income taxes) will have better schools. Oh wait, your next point is:
—fund all schools equally so there’s equality of opportunity; if we’re serious about everyone starting at the same place, we can’t disadvantage children - This concept gets up my nose. I went to NYC public schools and the NYC public college, and I've made a good life for myself. Success depends FAR more on your ingrained attitude toward education (derived during your formative years from your parents) than on the alleged "quality" of the school. You don't make equality by pulling the higher-performing people down, no one wants to watch a one-on-one basketball game between Michael Jordan and Michael Moore where Jordan is encumbered by 100 lbs of sand-bags to make it more equal.
Is our system perfect? Of course not, nothing made by man is. But our system has generated the free-est, most productive, most prosperous nation the world has ever seen, and what we've produced has lifted up the rest of the world as well.