I thought you were going to say “win elections”.

Just once, I’d like for Democrats to go through losing an election without demanding that our entire system of government be overturned.

Nah, I don’t think that’s going to happen. I think the big city folks who are most pissed about things like the Senate are the ones who are the most shackled to the current system that keeps the lights on and the gas burning. You don’t know what a revolution really is, and you should be grateful we have such a robust…

Grab a rifle, be the change you want to see in the world.

I might be willing to tolerate it to some extent

No, I like the Senate because it advances my state’s interests.

No. All you wanted was to sully his name with an unproveable rape charge. You couldn’t care less if he was actually convicted for it.

He feels like Hillary Clinton without the charisma. Choosing to run Michael Bloomberg in 2020 is the what happens when you hate Donald Trump instead of trying to understand him.

But they represent a majority of states.

You want to change it, you’re going to have to convince the little guys.  Can’t get around that.

Again, federal republic.  Pay attention please.

He represents a majority of the states.

As I explained, those living in California enjoy greater economic and cultural power. Weighting voting towards smaller states counter-balances this disparity, which is beneficial in the case of individuals such as yourself who are prejudiced against those smaller states. It’s really not much of a punishment, given how…

That the imbalance you fret about isn’t a bug, it’s a feature, and reflects the immense cultural and economic power that cities inevitably generate. Without the Senate, highly-populous states would have unimpeachable political power as well.  Given your prejudice against middle-America, you can understand why that…

Yeah, California is just suffering under the yoke of those evil Wyoming aristocrats ;)

You understand why I would prefer that people like you have a check on power, yes?

Because the people on that land don’t consider themselves as useless as you think they are.

And the House gets to control spending. But basically, yes: the authors of the Constitution with that disparity specifically in mind.

What influence should South Dakota have?

California does not have more political influence?