I'm sorry you feel personally attacked, since that's not the aim/goal of my post. It is just my observation that what you've been saying is basically a dogwhist

I'm sorry you feel personally attacked, since that's not the aim/goal of my post. It is just my observation that what you've been saying is basically a dogwhistle at disenfranchising those who need representation the most, whether you intended it or not. It's possibly a subconscious thing for you. It is true that rural votes are weighted in their favor, but if that were not the case, then this country would be controlled by a handful of states. Do you honestly think that California should make the call for how a person in Kansas should live? Do you really think laws made by and voted for by people in New York are the best laws for the people of Wisconsin? Should all our presidents have been decided by the will of 4 or 5 states out of the 50 states that make up the country? If you have a complaint about how votes/representation is decided, you could make a case to adapt the system more fairly. Stripping the disenfranchised of their voting rights is talk from the 1950s, and should be done away with just like slavery.