I think they would've been horrified at the idea of limiting the number of Representatives at 435.
Or that we would only have 50 states after 250 years.
“That is why the Founders wanted one Representative per 30,000 citizens.”
That would make little to zero change in the present DIm vs GOP proportions in the House of Representatives. While some less populated areas may have an increase in their numbers of representatives, so would more populace locations.
So where as now there are about 720,000 voters for each representative/congressional district, under your formula a place like Manhattan would have 24 additional voters for each on they currently have. The house would likely continue to have the same big-city vs rural proportions it does today.
My point was more directly related to the election of the President (via the Electoral College), which is supposed to be elected to represent “the nation” in the WIDEST sense, and to me the widest sense does not mean outsized influence for the “largest population” but instead for “more of the nation” as it is distributed all across the land. Counting counties reflects that in a way that “majority of the population” never will.