Posted on 07/22/2015 10:01:42 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
The state line between West and South California would be “interesting” runs between two houses along a wall close to where I live
No Mexico City North?
Wow is this good or bad?
I like this for Northern Californians (Jefferson) but on a national level don’t democrats benefit from this immensely?
I’m moving to South California. I will finally be among my own kind.
“Wow is this good or bad?”
Probably won’t make much of a difference in Congressional seats.
For the Senate seats, Jefferson and Central CA would lean Republican, and split in South CA.
Looking at that map, I’m guessing the 12 California senators would add up like this: 1 conservative, 3 rinos, and 8 liberal democrats.
I think I’d prefer to just stick with the 2 liberals democrats we have now.
Isn’t it just the county line?
For this to work, they must be ready to explain why it is a. Possible, within the next twenty years b. Necessary, c. Advantageous d. Financially Feasible for Califorians to scramble everything and start a new game.
If such a statewide plan is started, to educate the poplace, then a counter-education plan will also begin. It’s job will be to spread fear and mis-information. I don’t think it’s possible with my lifetime. We in California can’t even agree on how to store, damn and distribute our waters here, let alone our land and infrastructure.
Agreed.
Pod people trying to multiply their political influence and further rule and ruin our country.
Central California would do very well. Most of the agriculture, and the water to make it grow. Could charge Silicon Valley and Northern Cal anything they wanted for water, and would not be weighed down with all the welfare cases in SF and LA.
That’s the idea. North Cali will be the South. Might as well place landmines and make a law where no liberal can cross state lines to make it perfect.
One California is enough.
Dem scheme no doubt.
Scary Jerry’s certainly been damning the Central Valley farmers’ water.
Yes he has. With the help of Senator Barbra Boxer. Part of their legacy is to have given native fish priority over jobs and businesses. Their zealotry goes beyond loving animals to the point where the animals, trees and fleas become objects of worship and unquestioning devotion, something Patron Saints used to be used for.
California is a microcosm of the US in
terms of geopolitics. The Coastal area
which contains the most population by
far is liberal. The San Diego area may be an exception
The inland area including the Sierra Nevadas is more
conservative than liberal. The population density
is much less than on the coast.
I’m thinking that conservatism has an advantage under
such a split....more representation. However, this
is a silly plan overall. The current Jefferson plan
splits the state North and South. The winners would
be the Northerners who would have political power
which is something we don’t have now. Opponents
claim Nor Cal receives more in tax funds than we
pay. If true then SoCal should be happy to see us
go. The losers? That would be SoCal, Texas, Nevada,
Arizona, and, potentially, any state that has
picked off old California businesses over the
last many years. Why? Because Jefferson would
have no or low corporate taxes. We would be
open for business and, frankly, we are head
and shoulders above the other places when it
comes to climate and life style.
Will it happen? Nope, probably not.
I understand that San Diego, L.A., and Blyth are fighting over the name. Runner up gets Ciudad Chavez, third place is Jerry Brownsville.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.