Thanks, I just checked it out. What an insipid load of bloviation that FAQ page is! Dispute their numbers? Why should I? The numbers are correct, it's the philosophy that remains completely sophomoric. "Ohio has more people than a collection of small states, but their electoral representation isn't proportional!" Waah, waah, waah. The simple answer to the main complaint ("my vote doesn't 'count' because I live in Montana") is that if you want to be wined and dined by a politician, move to a freaking state that's competitive.
We’re not expecting to be wined and dined. ANY ATTENTION for 2/3rds of Americans who are ignored under the current system would be appreciated.
I find it hard to believe the Founding Fathers would endorse an electoral system where 2/3rds of the states and voters now are completely politically irrelevant. Presidential campaigns spend 98% of their resources in just 15 battleground states, where they aren’t hopelessly behind or safely ahead, and can win the bare plurality of the vote to win all of the state’s electoral votes. Now the majority of Americans, in small, medium-small, average, and large states are ignored. Virtually none of the small states receive any attention. Once the primaries are over, presidential candidates don’t visit or spend resources in 2/3rds of the states.
It's a non-partisan effort. As a result, the site contains a hodgepodge of philosophical justifications. Not agreeing with one does not invalidate another.
Regardless, I'm fascinated by your indifference to citizens not being represented in their government. You're quite correct that one solution would be to move from one state to another. Of course, it makes far more sense to affect your state legislature to allocate your electoral votes in a manner which would increase your influence without requiring you to move.