They didn’t have to. California is so far left, all you need to get a vote is have a (D) after your name. I’ll be damned if our country is run by California and/or New York voters. And as Windy said, that’s why we have the electoral college. We are a nation of sovereign states bound by a federal government that is accountable to everyone, not the Majority. People can like it or leave it.
Like it, leave it, or change it. That’s the beauty of a democracy.
Why should a Californian’s vote be worth less than someone from Wyoming? That makes absolutely no sense. Unless of course your party benefits from it of course. Same with Gerrymandering.
It’s not worth less. California has 55 votes. That almost as much as every Mountain State combined. You add in Washington and Oregon and it pretty much equates to everything west of the Mississippi north of Texas, never-mind Illinois and Minnesota are ridiculously reliable. Every state gets a voice in how this country is run, not every person. Or do you not understand that your voice is heard in the legislative branch where you directly elect your representation where as the President represents everyone, not just your district? I truly don’t understand how this basic concept of our form of government is so lost on modern society. The SCOTUS doesn’t represent you directly either, you elect local judges and your governor appoints Judges at the State level. The SCOTUS is there to determine if their actions are unconstitutional or not as they apply to the country.
Democracy = rule of the majority,
- population: over 40M
- GDP: over 3 TRILLION (CA would rank as the world's fifth largest economy if it were an independent country)
- land mass: 163,696 mi²
- Senators in Congress: 2
- population: over 1.6M
- GDP: over 100M
- land mass: 147,946 mi²
- Senators in Congress: 4
When the Constitution was written, our Founding Fathers either didn't foresee the extreme differentials in population, or believed that the Constitution would be a fluid document and amended to reflect such extremes. Nonetheless, it's OK to say 'I vote with the party that came out ahead because of the flaws in the Constitution, and I'm going to fight to prevent it from being changed' but it's ignorant to pretend this reflects a democracy. Recall that in the late 1990s into 2000, when it appeared that a Democrat would win the White House via electoral votes but lose the popular vote, the Republicans were actively whining about the system... but when the opposite happened -- twice -- to their candidate, and appears likely to happen again in the future, suddenly the system works!