It ' s a bit more lively and rousing when it ' s sped up a little and the vocal pitch has been raised just a bit . <| sep |> People wouldn ' t go NEAR low population areas . It ' s not cost effective , you want to maximize your gains . If this held true , no one would currently live in the cities . If the argument is instead that it ' s incentive for people to live there . please explain why people in rural areas should have their views hold sway over the majority on issues relating to the presidency . More people live in urban areas . That is where the majority of the population lives , each individual not area , people is an American citizen the same as each other . Why does the idea of handing specifically the presidency to rural areas address issues like Flint ? Because handling that seems like things which are in place for people in countless other positions through the system . Don ' t the government positions ranging from from state to the legislative branch which focus on specific region representation accomplish this ? Everyone seems to love yelling about states rights and such , and how the president isn ' t a dictator . why is Flint Obama ' s fault ? Why does a national position need a minority to be given authority over the majority ?