The electoral college- the greatest vote suppressor ever

[zipplewrath]

43. Again decieving

The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as far down as Arlington, TX) is only 15% of the population of the United States. 16% of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 cities. They voted 63% Democratic in 2004.

You're ignoring the larger "metropolitan" areas of these cities. Especially in the north east, but also the metropolis extending from LA County all the way down to San Diego. Same thing for the population density extending from DC to Boston. There is nothing comparable in the midwest or plains area. Campaigning will focus on these exceeding large demographic areas, and rely upon the national "overflow" of advertising and TV news coverage to expose them to their candidate. There will be fundraising in other areas, and you'll see some campaigning associated with those activities. And of course there will still be House and Senate races that will need to be supported, especially for a candidate looking for "coat tails" in a presidential election. But just as the campaigns currently focus on the battleground states, in a popular election they will chase individual votes. And their efforts will focus on where the votes are.

Further evidence of the way a nationwide presidential campaign would be run comes from national advertisers who seek out customers in small, medium, and large towns of every small, medium, and large state. A national advertiser does not write off Indiana or Illinois merely because a competitor makes more sales in those particular states.

This is a tad off as well. National advertisers aren't pursing votes where it is one or the other. They are pursuing purchases from people who can (and do) patronize MANY products. They advertise where they can turn a profit, and that profit includes a calculation of the advertising required to gain the required market share. A national campaign with relatively "unlimited" funds can afford to expand the reach of their campaign. But generally speaking, their funds won't be unlimited and they'll make choices, which is why even today campaigns rarely if ever go to Alaska, much less spend much up there. The cost in terms of time is too great.