Three Californias?

[A True Kaniggit]

Fools! Can't you see the true mastermind behind this nefarious plot? It's the U.S. flag making cabals who are dead set on getting the number of stars changed from 50. If this fails they'll probably try to get the Dakotas to combine next.

[The Marquis de Leech]

As mentioned previously, the Electoral College does not benefit rural areas. Rural Texas, rural California, rural Kansas, rural Vermont, all get completely ignored. Upstate New York gets completely ignored, as does Alaska. All that matters is Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

(There's also this bizarre idea that popular vote would suddenly be all about campaigning in cities - as though completely ignoring rural areas, which are much cheaper to campaign in - would somehow be a viable strategy. In terms of per-person pay-off, it's more cost-efficient to run advertisements in North Dakota or Alaska than Florida or Ohio, but no-one does, because the result is already known).

[The Marquis de Leech]

As for rebellion, I think a situation where the Democrats are running ads in North Dakota, or where the Republicans are running ads in Vermont, might help defuse the current state of American political polarisation. Because they'd both be trying to talk to the other side - which means you don't have the situation where both sides write-off whole swathes of the country as being from Mars.

[DMC]

16 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

There's also this bizarre idea that popular vote would suddenly be all about campaigning in cities - as though completely ignoring rural areas, which are much cheaper to campaign in - would somehow be a viable strategy. In terms of per-person pay-off, it's more cost-efficient to run advertisements in North Dakota or Alaska than Florida or Ohio, but no-one does, because the result is already known

I imagine the general strategy for most candidates would be ad buys in rural/cheaper urban areas and staging as much events in large cities to maximize free media.  So in that way I suppose it might "hurt" rural areas - but this is already the strategy anyway, just confined to a handful of states.

[Maester Drew]

On 6/13/2018 at 2:12 PM, Scott de Montevideo! said:

It would concentrate most of the Liberal voters in "California" and create a new "red" state with "Southern California".  I'm not sure how "Northern California" would play out with the left of center areas like San Francisco competing with the more conservative areas in the rest of Northern California.  

Based on the data from David Leip's Atlas, I calculated how these three states would have voted in the previous five presidential elections.

Spoiler

 

California

• 2000: 60.38% (D) and 35.17% (R)
• 2004: 60.62% (D) and 38.05% (R)
• 2008: 66.97% (D) and 30.97% (R)
• 2012: 66.92% (D) and 30.51% (R)
• 2016: 68.86% (D) and 24.81% (R)

Northern California

• 2000: 56.25% (D) and 37.78% (R)
• 2004: 59.91% (D) and 38.62% (R)
• 2008: 65.41% (D) and 32.27% (R)
• 2012: 64.44% (D) and 32.40% (R)
• 2016: 64.42% (D) and 27.73% (R)

Southern California

• 2000: 43.23% (D) and 52.72% (R)
• 2004: 41.69% (D) and 57.11% (R)
• 2008: 50.03% (D) and 47.82% (R)
• 2012: 49.06% (D) and 48.43% (R)
• 2016: 51.49% (D) and 41.79% (R)

 

In short, California and Northern California would both be solidly Democratic, while Southern California would be a swing state in presidential elections.

[Yukle]

17 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

As mentioned previously, the Electoral College does not benefit rural areas. Rural Texas, rural California, rural Kansas, rural Vermont, all get completely ignored. Upstate New York gets completely ignored, as does Alaska. All that matters is Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania.

I won the Electoral College and the popular vote, but the fake news media refuses to acknowledge the 116 million illegal votes that were cast for other candidates.

[Zorral]

I'd like to know what the basis is for the locations chosen to ship secretly all these kidnapped children?

A map of where they go is in this NY Times article.  Notice that with hardly an exception the vast center isn't getting these kids (supposedly).  They are either kept on the border of AZ and Texas, some to Florida, and then up the east and west coasts.

The map is about half way down in the piece. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/nyregion/cuomo-immigration-children-politics.html? 

 

CNN has some information too, in which a 'spokesman' says, 

 

Quote:

Quote

He added it is "pretty rare" someone would go to New York . . . .

 

But, as we see from the map above, it's not rare. At all. Additionally, the CNN story tells us, for one example, a shelter in Michigan has been receiving babies, some as young as three months -- since April. 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/21/us/cities-taking-separated-migrant-children/index.html

 

These ARE nazis. Proud to be nazis They don't even bother hiding it. 

As nazis do, they create a crisis than doesn't and didn't exist. This story in the NY Times features Texas officials saying there isn't a border crisis of illegal immigrants. There are NOT masses pouring to the US / Mexican border.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/23/us/border-trump-immigration.html?
 

Quote

“There is not a crisis in the city of Brownsville with regards to safety and security,” said Mr. Martinez, who has lived in Brownsville since the late 1970s. “There’s no gunfire. Most of the people that are migrating are from Central America. It’s not like they’re coming over here to try to take anybody’s job. They’re trying to just save their own lives. We’re doing fine, quite frankly.”

 

Yet the numero uno orange nazi is cris-crossing the country howling to his supporters, firing them up into infernos of frenzied hatred for these non-existent people, so much so they will go out and attack perfectly innocent citizens, as we hear more and more often:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/23/us/politics/republican-voters-trump.html?
 

[Red Tiger]

Apologies for my stupidity, but how do they rationalize LA not being part of the Southern California state? It's more Southern than Kern for instance and Kern is part of their Southern California proposal.

[lokisnow]

On 6/24/2018 at 12:41 PM, Red Tiger said:

Apologies for my stupidity, but how do they rationalize LA not being part of the Southern California state? It's more Southern than Kern for instance and Kern is part of their Southern California proposal.

They think San Diego and Orange County are so republican that if they sever them both from Los Angeles they will get a red state.

but it’s only the rich fucks and military  in SD and OC that are republican, the rest of those communities are not. For the most part the democrat party being dedicated to losing and not giving a fuck about minorities has never bothered activating the populace in these areas, but democrats might do so if it were a separate state, and then it might not wind up the red enclave the rich fucks want.

[Starkess]

San Diego isn't even that conservative. Most of the military stationed there are not CA residents or voters, and the ones who stay after the military tend not to be the most hardcore Rs. It's conservative compared to LA or SF, maybe, but it's not exactly a red city. This is just my impression from living there, but a quick check of Wikipedia shows that it's basically the case. The county tends to vote R overall but the city itself not as much, and even the county went blue in the last 3 elections, including a +20% margin for Clinton in 2016.

I mean I get the logic in trying to split it off, and when combined with the rural CA areas it might be a red state, but San Diego itself is not.

[Week]

4 hours ago, Starkess said:

San Diego isn't even that conservative. Most of the military stationed there are not CA residents or voters, and the ones who stay after the military tend not to be the most hardcore Rs. It's conservative compared to LA or SF, maybe, but it's not exactly a red city. This is just my impression from living there, but a quick check of Wikipedia shows that it's basically the case. The county tends to vote R overall but the city itself not as much, and even the county went blue in the last 3 elections, including a +20% margin for Clinton in 2016.

I mean I get the logic in trying to split it off, and when combined with the rural CA areas it might be a red state, but San Diego itself is not.

^^La Jolla is the conservative area of San Diego County -- the city of San Diego is not nearly as conservative.