For US residents only!

[Aegon]

In this year’s election, Hillary Clinton won about 62% of California’s popular vote, which was a little less than 7 million. The total number of people that voted (Republican, Democrat, or other) in Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Mississippi this past election adds up to 7 million. Do you think it’s fair that 60% of California has the same say as 100% of NINE other states? The Electoral College obviously has issues but popular vote gives a ridiculous amount of power to some states and virtually none in others.

Everyone's arguing that states don't matter when 1 person = 1 person. But there are certain interests that vary by region. You're basically telling the midwest they don't matter because they live in an ill-populated state.

Like I said, there are built-in and necessary inequities of the Senate and House that prevent the populous states from ruling over the smaller ones, and therefore their interests are more than fairly represented in the federal government. Again, Wyoming has one Senator per roughly 300,000 people; California, one Senator per 19,000,000. 

I don't know where you're from, but here in California, the most the POTUS candidates do is run TV ads here and there and hold fundraisers for people who can afford tens of thousands of dollars for a plate of chicken and vegetables. Other than that, they don't campaign here because the electoral college makes us not one of the swing states. If it were a popular vote, then Republican candidates would have the opportunity to get out here and garner more votes, which in turn would help the predominantly red states. 

It isn't like Trump lost the popular vote by 15 million. Had it been worth his time to campaign hard on the west coast, it's not unreasonable to think that he could have campaigned his way to several million more votes than he actually received. I fail to see how that is inherently unfair.

I live in NY, so I know how you feel. But you didn't respond to my point about regional interests. Also, there's nothing that you said that couldn't be solved by letting states split their electoral votes.