[Libloather]

The three Californias would have roughly equivalent populations and wealth. A state of Northern California would include almost the entire upper half of the state, including San Francisco; a Southern California would contain most of the rest. A third state, called simply California, would fold in Los Angeles and extend up the coast to Monterey.

I would place San Francisco in the southern portion with the other deranged folks. Leave the north out of all that mess. This could have great potenial!

[aquila48]

That division would be a total disaster for conservatives. Instead of 1 ultra liberal states you would have three.

[Cobra64]

Related... Something that most folks fail to consider when calling for jettisoning the entire state to Mexico:

http://www.hcdmag.com/military-bases-california/

[Behind the Blue Wall]

I bet the libs would indeed love to do this. It would be three blue states. If you want to carve a red state out of California it would basically be Northern California excluding the Bay Area and Sacramento, and then down the Sierras into far eastern California. In theory the Central Valley is red, but that probably will only last until the next amnesty.

[King Moonracer]

The rats would gain more senators than we would.

[x]

The real split in the state is coastal versus inland.

The inland North (sparsely populated to be sure) wouldn't much like to be coupled to San Francisco.

Grouping Los Angeles with the coastal counties to the north and separating it from the rest of Southern California also looks senseless.

But it's not going to happen.

[Pikachu_Dad]

How many Senators do you want California to have?

[who_would_fardels_bear]

There was an actual attempt to split Los Angeles into three cities because San Pedro and the San Fernando Valley believed they weren't getting their fair share of attention.

In order to prevent this secession the powers that be temporarily upped police enforcement, etc. in the suburbs and ran lots of scare stories.

The people voted against secession, i.e. they took the Blue Pill.

Secession will never happen because the people will have to vote on it and they will vote no, either because of fear of change or because they believe it will really not change anything and just cost a lot of money.

The elephant in the room is the evermore centralized nature of our government: who cares if California is one state or three if most decisions are now made at the Federal level?

[arthurus]

Just so long as it is not done such that two of the new states are not dominated by coastal Democrat megacities. We don’t need two or four additional Communist Senators.

[blueplum]

NO!

Splitting Calif into 3, instead of 6, allows big city liberals to continue to control everything that goes on.

6 state solution is the only way to isolate the major urban areas

[Wuli]

If they can get away with it, then I want to take the most conservative state, and like the three Californias, give it four more U.S. Senators.

[musicman]

Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help To Keep FR In The Battle !!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[morphing libertarian]

If you put Sacramento, SF and LA in separate states the population will dominate that state and you will have more democrats in the senate.