Is it better for states to be divided closer to 55-45 and “disenfranchise” closer to half of the people? Or perhaps we compromise and “disenfranchise” everyone?

Is it better for states to be divided closer to 55-45 and “disenfranchise” closer to half of the people? Or perhaps we compromise and “disenfranchise” everyone? Majority rule is always an exercise in the minority not getting their way. Decentralization—i.e. federalism—reduces the size of the minority that isn’t getting their way. If politics is completely national, maybe 49% of the people will be unhappy. If that 49% includes 66% of Idahoans, and you let the people of Idaho decide most issues at the state level, they can be happy and so can the Californians because there’s no need for Idaho and California to live under the same laws. Besides, someone living in Idaho and voting for Biden may prefer Biden as President but still prefer the state laws of Idaho. And if he doesn’t, moving states is easier than changing the President.