Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
Historically most presidents who win re-election have always increased their margin of victory.

But no, I don't really see a problem with Munchkin's vote "counting for more" because I just don't see it in terms of that raw math. After all, I live in an area where I can influence far more people at once, who in turn control more electoral votes. But I prefer not to think of the electoral college as some kind of state vs. state competition.
It's a nice talking point, but so what? Obama won and it wouldn't make the slightest difference if he won with a larger share of the vote.

Democracy is defined by relative worth of everyone's vote, not but everyone's ability to influence people. If your criterion for democracy is "the ability to influence an equal amount of people", then you should kind of want money banned from politics. Adelson can influence far more people than some guy living in a project.