[TomGuy]

Without knowing the political demographics of current California or the proposed new states, I would figure that they would gerrymander the new states in such as manner as to decrease the Republican influence and increase the Democratic influence.

Otherwise, why bother?

Such a carving up would also impact the Electoral College voting in presidential elections.

Does anyone think they would intentionally create Republican strongholds?

[OneWingedShark]

Without knowing the political demographics of current California or the proposed new states, I would figure that they would gerrymander the new states in such as manner as to decrease the Republican influence and increase the Democratic influence.
Does anyone think they would intentionally create Republican strongholds?

Given the lack of opposition by the Republicans, I have to ask: would it matter?
In fact, I think The Tao of Republican Orthodoxy adequately shows the lack of difference between the two parties — but in case it doesn't convince you, how about considering this:

1. They claim to be for government accountability, yet their opposition has been nonexistant on:
   1. Fast & Furious, the easiest treason case in 70 years and easily provable as state-sponsored terrorism.
   2. The DEA laundering money to the drug cartels.
   3. The NSA domestic-spying.
   4. The IRS politically-motivated targeting.
   5. The arbitrary alteration of law via executive fiat (eg: Affordable Care Act).
   6. The arbitrary alteration of law via judicial fiat (eg: Affordable Care Act).
   7. The imposition of laws dangerous to liberty (eg: the NDAA's suspension of Hebeus Corpus and allowance for assassination of citizens).
   8. The constant/consistent raising of the debt ceiling, selling every taxpayer and their decedents into slavery as it is guaranteed by taxes… which you are forced to pay under penalty of law. (Ironically, they could claim that by their position as representatives the incurance of such crushing debt is voluntary and the 13th Amendment therefore does not apply.)
2. They claim to be for the second amendment — yet they do not fight things like the GCA or NFA, nor other current gun-laws. Instead they buff up their reputation, citing things like Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban… which had a sunset clause and therefore they literally had to do nothing to end it.
3. They claim to be against abortion — even going so far as to add no exceptions to that party-plank.
   They do not mean a word of it: they nominated, indeed pushed, Mr. Romney, who is well know as being for abortion in the case of rape, incest, or the mother's health*.
   (* The mother's health is actually code-word for at will, both politically and legally.)
4. They claim to be for fiscal responsibility, yet are willing participants in the ever-increasing government spending. —Moreover, look at how they react to the idea of auditing the Federal Reserve (which would reveal much).
5. They claim to support the Constitution, yet they support a set of policies that has damaged 90% of the Bill of Rights.
6. They claim to respect the military — yet have commissioned a literally unwinnable* war: The War on Terror.
   (* There is no victory condition, no way to say "we won".)

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY GOVERNMENT. [Direct Link]
The Tao of Republican Orthodoxy [Direct Link]	The Modern Democratic Party & You [Direct Link]

[afraidfortherepublic]

There is no Republican influence.