Candidates have a lot more rallies in big cities, regardless of their swing to get the base out (New York, Boston, LA area and Silicon Valley, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Chicago), a lot of camping in the large states.. CA/NY/TX
GOP campaigns in California and the west coast and the northeast, Dems campaign more in the south, OH/FL/WI/MI/PA//CO still remain pretty high on the importance list. Smaller states like New Hampshire and possibly Nevada and New Mexico and stuff get dropped off the importance list though
and the biggest thing is except most of the ad buys and the money dumping to be in the 100 biggest media markets.. regardless of whether that area is red or blue.
I don't see how people think rural states would all the sudden become important though.. it is cheaper and easier to campaign in single counties in states like Florida, New York and California that have more voters than almost the entire state of Iowa or West Virginia or Kansas.
Some things change but not that much.. and flyover country still is
It would dramatically restructure the way Presidential campaigns distribute television advertising. Though the content of ads in well-populated base areas would be a lot different from the ads in swing areas.
I wonder if campaigns might emphasize turning out the base over appealing to moderate/independent voters. After all, base voters are reliable while independents are often fickle and have low interest and information about politics.
