The core issue is money: It is more efficient to focus campaign efforts in high-density areas. The number of dollars per vote only goes up as the campaign goes more rural, so rural interests tend to be more neglected.
Some of this imbalance has been reduced by the internet, which provides a space where the reach of a candidate is not determined by population density. However, in-person campaign efforts are still vital, so the disadvantage remains.
This is what I’d imagine an electoral college at the state level to look like:
The strength here is two-fold:
- Delegates of rural communities are just as accessible for prospective candidates as those of urban communities.
- Rural communities can pool their electoral power together, regardless of their dispersion across the state.