So a bunch of us are about to get stuck with a president we didn't vote for and are feeling pretty frustrated that a guy could lose the popular vote by 3 million and still win the election because of the electoral college.
Ideally, we'd abolish the electoral college, but the small states that benefit from this system are never going to sign off on that change, so it's never going to happen.
So are those of us in the majority doomed to be ruled by the minority forever?
Maybe not. I have a workaround.
This workaround requires one very rich person and a hundred thousand other people.
Now, a hundred thousand sounds like a lot, and it is, but in a country of 300 million people, it's not actually that huge of a number. (.03%, if I'm doing the math right!) It's fewer people than currently live in Norman, OK or Denton, TX or Olathe, KS.
Since we can't change the system that gives small states disproportionate power, let's use that to our advantage! Let's take Wyoming!
Wyoming is our least populous state. I know nothing about it except this: 100,000 people could make this a rock-solid progressive state. This means only 3 electoral votes, but, hey, every one counts. It means only one US Representative, but see above. The big prize here is two Senate seats.
In the most recent Senate race in California, Kamala Harris won by 3 million votes, getting about 6.5 million votes. In the most recent Senate race in Wyoming, Mike Enzi won by 30,000 votes, with a total of 121,000 votes. These two Senators have an absolutely equal voice in making laws in the United States.
100,000 people could change the balance of power in the Senate for generations.
But how do you get 100,000 people to move to Wyoming, and where do they live once they get there?
Here's my solution: Bowie, Wyoming. Which is where the rich person comes in. We need one very rich person to create some kind of artist colony/music venue/theater/whatever in some unincorporated territory. I'd like to name it after David Bowie, since naming it after a guy who let his freak flag fly for decades and played around with gender expectations would be a pretty clear signal of the kind of place it's going to be. (I'm a much bigger Prince fan, but we already have a Princeton that sucks, and Prince just doesn't sound like a city name to me, but I could bend on this issue.)
Can you build a city out of nothing in the middle of nowhere? I dunno--can you?
Can you get artists to relocate to a godforsaken spot with dirt cheap real estate? I dunno--can you?
I mean, the idea sounds ridiculous at first, but it could actually be done.
I dream of a city with a diverse population, powered by green technology and featuring the most vibrant arts scene in the Western US. That, oh yeah, also plays a crucial role in helping the progressive majority in this country beat back the agenda of the reactionary minority.
So, if you are a progressive person with a ton of money, please consider building a state of the art arts facility in Wyoming. And found a town named after David Bowie.