This has nothing to do with Orwell. Im not sure why you bring him up.

The forefathers designed the system this way. I agree with the way it was designed. It prevents big states like California and New York from calling all the shots.

I agree with the forefathers. You do not. Simple.

Because saying "it's a representative democracy" is doublespeak. If you have one person representing tens of millions and another person representing a small city (~150k people), and they have the same vote, it's not meaningfully "representative". Saying "it's a representative democracy" doesn't tell you anything about the fairness of the system.

> I agree with the way it was designed.

Because it favors you. It would be a bad system even if it was the other way around (i.e. it favored the other side).

> It prevents big states like California and New York from calling all the shots.

I'm still to hear a good argument for why it's better for small states to call shots instead.

> I agree with the forefathers. You do not. Simple.

I'm fine with that. They were as fallible as anyone else and could not have foreseen that their system might have flaws. There's no need to deify them and think that everything they did was right.