According to the US Census, most people in the US live in urban areas, so any state with winner-take-all electoral votes ( most states ) is already being dominated by its urban areas, with little or no voice for rural voters. Contrary to the argument below, rural voters would be much better off without the Electoral College, or with a split vote for electors. Considered state-by-state, nearly every state is more urban than rural. To the extent that the Electoral College does not represent the will of the majority of voters, it serves to undermine the democratic process, and faith in democracy as a way of life. There isn't any more reason a few rural voters should outweigh many urban voters, than there was for the few urban voters to outweigh the many rural, as the US was once mostly rural. One person, one vote.
According to the US Census, most people in the US live in urban areas, so any state with winner-take-all electoral votes ( most states ) is already being dominated by its urban areas, with little or no voice for rural voters. Contrary to the argument below, rural voters would be much better off without the Electoral College, or with a split vote for electors. Considered state-by-state, nearly every state is more urban than rural. To the extent that the Electoral College does not represent the will of the majority of voters, it serves to undermine the democratic process, and faith in democracy as a way of life. There isn't any more reason a few rural voters should outweigh many urban voters, than there was for the few urban voters to outweigh the many rural, as the US was once mostly rural. One person, one vote.