The electoral college- the greatest vote suppressor ever

[zipplewrath]

29. No

Sorry, but from a campaign perspective, campaigning in almost any form in North Dakota is a loser.

It costs too much, regardless of how, and not just money.

Every voter one "turns on" in an extremely low population region, is easily 10 turned "off" in a high density region. And since campaigns are "national" in the sense of their exposure, you can't campaign one way in North Dakota and another in NYC. They'll spend their money in markets where it will expose them to the most number of potential voters FOR THEM. They'll spend their money trying to get as many voters from the 75% that live near the coast, and not waste money trying to get some of the 25% in the center. There will be no reason to go to Wyoming because every minute you spend trying to get some portion of their 500,000 people is a minute you're not trying to get votes from the 4 MILLION daytime residents in Manhattan.

Furthermore, in terms of crafting positions, it will become an urban race because when you can get 10% more of the urban population (80%) by taking a particular position, it doesn't matter than you lose 30% of the rural population (20%). At worst it's a wash, and at best much of that 20% wasn't going to vote for you anyway (or already was regardless).

Go to any state with severe disparities of urban/rural population distribution. The urban tends to dominate the state wide elections (mostly governors and cabinets). There are VERY frequent complaints about it, mostly from the GOP who then tries to address it through voter suppression and Gerrymandering.