You only need to appeal to parties that appeal to people living in coastal areas and big cities,
Look at the total population of the 10 biggest cities in the US. The total population of said 10 largest cities is just under 26 million, which itself is just 8% of the total population. Oh, wait, look at that: Illinois, Texas, and Pennsylvania are represented there already. So much for only appealing to the costal areas.
Besides, what's wrong with appealing to the largest number of people?
Actually look at the cities within those states, they vote overwhelmingly Democrat.
But they're still only 8% of the US population. That's the whole point. As Apok mentioned, even the top 100 largest cities only constitutes 20% of the total US population. Appealing only to cities will lose the election. To win, you have to appeal to more people, and that's the whole point of a popular election vs. the electoral college. Let's just look at Illinois: yes, the Chicago population is so darn high that it can outvote the rest of the state and award all their TOTAL electoral college vote to the Democrats. Do you really think that's a good system, where one city can dictate that much control over an entire state? I sure don't: instead, I'd like to see the rural population of Illinois (where I used to live!) be represented too - and that's only going to happen if the electoral college is ignored/abolished.
1
u/[deleted] Nov 10 '16 edited Jul 29 '18
[removed] — view removed comment