The electoral college should be apportioned on the basis of land area

The electoral college should be apportioned on the basis of land area. Obviously this would mean that Alaska would have more votes in the presidential election and seats in Congress than California. 

This would completely destroy the incentive to bring immigrants in to the country, and with it, the entire motive for replacement (at least politically). It would also put conservative solidly in charge and turn politics into a fight between libertarians and nationalists rather than liberals and conservatives. 

It would mean permanent defeat for the left, at least at the national level.

The reasons are more than just instrumental. Cities are dysgenic, hostile to human flourishing and family formation. They are great swamps of human biomass where people become lost and alienated. Because all ties are voluntary and easily severed there is nothing to maintain strong communities except identity politics groups and cults. The church gets turned into a business with fleeting associations just like everything else. Hookup culture and degeneracy thrive in large cities. Large cities are the only places with enough people to support BDSM dungeons, swinger communities, gay bars, bath houses and the like. In big cities there is no reputational system, no one knows each other, and there is no guarantee that the person you meet isn't a pedophile, rapist, or feminist. With small towns widespread understanding of people's reputations simultaneously keeps them in line and tells you who to avoid.

Cities should not be making the decisions for the countryside. They should probably not even be making decisions for themselves. Moldbug talks about 'manipulating procedural outcomes" but he uses this term derisively to describe democracy and it's politics. Well here is a simple procedural manipulation to fundamentally change American politics forever. Don't think it can be done? Most states have Republican governors and all it takes is a constitutional convention or similar with a majority of states. I am sure there is a way to do it. 

Another reason has to do with birth rates. There's a proven correlation between moving to the city and having less children. On the farm children help out with farm labor. If civilization has a future this is where it's likely to happen, where the babies are still being made. Giving political power to the cities gives power to a death spiral. During demographic shrinkage the elderly vote themselves all the benefits. This makes it hard for the young to afford to have children, and when the young can't afford to have children it exacerbates demographic collapse. Shifting political power to the countryside puts it in the hands of people who still have children and disempowers the very old people who exacerbate demographic collapse by stealing wealth from the young to pay for their pensions. It also puts that power in the hands of people who have children and thus have an investment in the future. Disempowering the cities is a demographic imperative for the survival of a people.