Posted on 07/22/2015 10:01:42 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Political prisoner?
You apparently only know what the
liberal media wants you to know about
the big picture in California. Your
choice.
Bye. Give my regards to LA LA.
Been around California much?
Ignorance must be bliss.
Perseverando, thank you! That was beautiful! I love Roy O. You just made my night!
I’m from NorCal. Central Cal gets water from
us, not the other way around. Could you be
confusing Northern California with the Bay
Area?
Now, that’s funny. Brown reminds me of
the mean school principal that nobody
likes. When he first started chirping
about the current drought he was scolding
us like a class full of school kids.
That’s an interesting perspective. I was frankly amazed that it was close enough to being on the ballot that it made a report in USA Today.
You are correct about the Jefferson state. I have told the wife many times how much I love CA. I just couldn’t live there because of the costs and politics.
somehow, i don’t think the rest of the states want 5 more California states (i.e. 10 more senators) added to the union.
maybe Mexico wouldn’t mind though. much of their population is already there.
We ought to let California split but then have Congress deny admission to any new states that elect libs.
We could work out a compromise. Make it six, half slave (heavy tax), half free.
The "Double Cross" flag of the State of Jefferson.
Double crossed and abandoned by Sacramento and Spokane
18 out of 19 counties of the proposed State of Jefferson voted in favor withdrawal from California.
Humboldt's county supervisor didn't hold a vote. Of course Humboldt is filled with leftist.
The rest of the State of Jefferson is very conservative and libertarian.
Great. They’ll probably have a vampire plague next.
You are under the mistaken MSM promoted notion
that 100% of California is liberal. If the state
was split then conservatism would be the winner.
If you don’t believe me then do a little research
and you will see that the opposition to the
formation of the state of Jefferson comes from the
Democrats. You might also check out a red/blue
presidential election map. You will see a lot of
coastal blue and inland red. If you spent time in
Central Valley or Sierra Nevada small towns you
would meet some regular,good old conservative
American people.
i lived in CA from 1992-2003. i am well aware of the political makeup of the state. notice in my comments, i made no mention of party affiliation. the problem is that the other states would have their political power diluted if CA goes from 1 state to 6 (i.e. 2 senators to 12) that’s a tough sell and something i would also be 100% against.
California is already two states: in reality, Oregon is North California.
I am not sure I follow what you mean
regarding diluting political power of
other states if California is split into
several separate states. California does
not get more representation. States are
independent. The conservative people of
my region (new state) are not going to
elect the same kind of people that the
voters of the “State of Greater Los Angeles”
(or whatever they are called) will choose.
Truthfully, in the case of the proposed state
of Jefferson do you think the mainly
conservative people who are promoting it actually
want more liberal legislators? Hell no!
Diluting the power of other states? Well, maybe the
liberal states. Unless you are a liberal Democrat
it doesn’t seem like you should be bothered. What
am I missing?
california splitting into 6 californias would not yield much change in power in the house where representatives are apportioned due to population.
but it makes a big difference in the senate where each state gets 2 senators. that would be a BIG problem for other states, and you would find Texas and NY and other states with large populations immediately consider doing the same thing. it’s basic self-interest.
it doesn’t matter what parties they belong to either. the simple existence of 12 california senators would piss off the 2 from NY or the 2 from TX or the 2 from FL. there are issues that all 12 senators from california would find common cause on that other states would not. that’s a problem. that’s what i mean by dilution. for example, water issues. there’s no way AZ and NM and CO and UT and WY and NV would want to see their 12 current senate votes marginalized by turning 2 CA senators into 12. let’s say there is a dispute about the amount of water that flows from colorado river to california to meet the exploding needs of illegals in california. right now, california has some say in federal policy with 2 senate votes, but nobody would be happy to give them final say with 12 votes. water rights in arid western states is a big issue, as you no doubt already know.
just one of many examples. don’t think about it in terms of national policy... think about it in terms of the balance of power between neighboring states.
Why are you stuck on this 12 California
senators thing? Would “State of North Eastern
California” senators necessarily side with
“State of Southern California” senators
in a Colorado River water dispute with Arizona?
Hell no! New states are independent of each other.
Let me state that again...New states are INDEPENDENT
OF EACH OTHER. California will NOT have 12 senators
any more than Dakota has 4 senators or Carolina has
4 senators. In terms of regional disputes then, yes,
you may have a minor point. Increasing Western States
senatorial representation could effect the East. But
just how many of the nation’s issues are regional in
nature? We certainly don’t hear about them as much as
we hear about big, national issues.
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.