The Senate was designed to protect the interests of smaller states. Over time, this has amplified the power of the Republican Party, which dominates rural areas. As the Wall Street Journal pointed out last March, "In 2013, 77 percent of rural Americans were represented by a House Republican. But in urban areas — which by the government's definition includes both cities and suburbs — slightly less than half of residents were represented by congressional Republicans, despite the GOP's 30-seat majority in the House."
Indeed, WalletHub found that red states have more powerful voters than blue states overall. They calculated the data by looking at the number of federal elected officials per person in each state in recent election cycles.
In presidential elections, the number of voters per Electoral College vote doesn't always translate into a perfect equation of power. In such a large race with limited resources, campaigns are focused like a laser on swing states that flip between parties in successive presidential elections. That means no one hardly ever bothers visiting Vermont during the general election. Thus, they might technically have a lot of power-per-voter over Vermont's three electoral votes, but no one is paying attention because it's a done deal from the word "go."
So what about the closest Senate races in 2014?
According to WalletHub's data, Alaska voters -- unsurprisingly -- are the most powerful. North Carolina voters, meanwhile, have the best chance of seeing their vote diluted (of all the states holding key races).
In an election year in which so few people will vote, however, people everywhere will have their vote amplified. Whether the person they elect will represent a lot of people or a few, however, depends on where they live.