NationStates

Posted: **Fri Apr 13, 2018 6:48 pm**

Herskerstad wrote:Would even the divisions give one Red block for two blue ones, or would it just accomplish giving Cali 6 senators?

You would have one red block, one purple, and one solid blue. To in effect it would be pretty balanced. Nor Cal would be the purple or light blue.

Posted: **Fri Apr 13, 2018 7:34 pm**

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
Smaller states already have more power. This proposal wouldn't give any minority a voice.

See: Northern California.

Oooooorrrr we could make elections based on popular vote.

Posted: **Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:23 pm**

Cekoviu wrote:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA wrote:See: Northern California.

Oooooorrrr we could make elections based on popular vote.

To bad some in this thread hate the idea of a PR system

Posted: **Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:57 pm**

Thermodolia wrote:
Cekoviu wrote:Oooooorrrr we could make elections based on popular vote.

To bad some in this thread hate the idea of a PR system

What's wrong with simple popular vote?

Posted: **Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:16 pm**

Good.

B A L K A N I Z E.

Posted: **Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:39 pm**

San Lumen wrote:
Thermodolia wrote:To bad some in this thread hate the idea of a PR system

What's wrong with simple popular vote?

If we're talking about the Presidency I'd say nothing. Though do note that the popular vote in a Popular Vote System will not be the same as the popular vote numbers from these electoral college elections. Voting patterns would change.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:37 am**

Mujahidah wrote:
San Lumen wrote:What's wrong with simple popular vote?

If we're talking about the Presidency I'd say nothing. Though do note that the popular vote in a Popular Vote System will not be the same as the popular vote numbers from these electoral college elections. Voting patterns would change.

I dont understand what you mean

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:52 am**

New Emeline wrote:Why do they want to do this?

I'm betting it's about increased division between rural and urban America as of the 2016 election. Not unlike how people have been talking about splitting up Texas.

Whether this division is justified depends on to what extent you blame rural America, urban America, or their refusal to work together. Perhaps splitting them up might serve as a social experiment as to whose ideas work better, and then they can work together on the ideas of the winner, but social experiments are known for sources of error...

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:54 am**

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:
New Emeline wrote:Why do they want to do this?

I'm betting it's about increased division between rural and urban America as of the 2016 election. Not unlike how people have been talking about splitting up Texas.

Whether this division is justified depends on to what extent you blame rural America, urban America, or their refusal to work together. Perhaps splitting them up might serve as a social experiment as to whose ideas work better, and then they can work together on the ideas of the winner, but social experiments are known for sources of error...

Many of the rural parts of the state would unable to sustain themselves without the populous coastal counties.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:02 am**

San Lumen wrote:A billionaire from Silicon Valley has supposedly submitted 600,000 signatures to the Secretary of State's office for a referendum to split California into three states. It's not officially on the ballot as signatures must still be verified.

Not verified yet I see.

San Lumen wrote:Water rights could be another sticking point.

Yeah, California doesn't have enough water to split up or secede for that matter.

Overall pretty silly.

Edit: the article says the guy originally wanted 6 states lol

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:06 am**

Benjabobaria wrote:
San Lumen wrote:A billionaire from Silicon Valley has supposedly submitted 600,000 signatures to the Secretary of State's office for a referendum to split California into three states. It's not officially on the ballot as signatures must still be verified.

Not verified yet I see.

San Lumen wrote:Water rights could be another sticking point.

Yeah, California doesn't have enough water to split up or secede for that matter.

Overall pretty silly.

Edit: the article says the guy originally wanted 6 states lol

It will take several weeks for the Secretary of State's office to verify them. Last time he claimed to have 1.3 million signatures but fell well short during the verification process.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:10 am**

Benjabobaria wrote:
San Lumen wrote:A billionaire from Silicon Valley has supposedly submitted 600,000 signatures to the Secretary of State's office for a referendum to split California into three states. It's not officially on the ballot as signatures must still be verified.

Not verified yet I see.

San Lumen wrote:Water rights could be another sticking point.

Yeah, California doesn't have enough water to split up or secede for that matter.

Overall pretty silly.

Edit: the article says the guy originally wanted 6 states lol

Northern CA has loads of water. People that would be in trouble would be the southern folks.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:16 am**

I don't care about Politics anymore, California needs to die

Whether that be Politically or Geographically, the state needs to die (not the people though, no dead people pls)

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:32 am**

Hammer Britannia wrote:I don't care about Politics anymore, California needs to die

Whether that be Politically or Geographically, the state needs to die (not the people though, no dead people pls)

Yeah, um, as one of the people there, I quite like California. Maybe leave it until June 15. Then I'll be back at home and you can do what you want.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:43 am**

Geneviev wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:I don't care about Politics anymore, California needs to die

Whether that be Politically or Geographically, the state needs to die (not the people though, no dead people pls)

Yeah, um, as one of the people there, I quite like California. Maybe leave it until June 15. Then I'll be back at home and you can do what you want.

I didn't say it would happen immediately

And Geographically is the worst case scenario

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:47 am**

Hammer Britannia wrote:
Geneviev wrote:Yeah, um, as one of the people there, I quite like California. Maybe leave it until June 15. Then I'll be back at home and you can do what you want.

I didn't say it would happen immediately

And Geographically is the worst case scenario

How?

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:48 am**

San Lumen wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:I didn't say it would happen immediately

And Geographically is the worst case scenario

How?

California is OK when it comes to nature.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:50 am**

Hammer Britannia wrote:
San Lumen wrote:How?

California is OK when it comes to nature.

It is beautiful but there is no reason to break up the state.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:52 am**

San Lumen wrote:
Hammer Britannia wrote:California is OK when it comes to nature.

It is beautiful but there is no reason to break up the state.

Other than the fact that it's filled with innocent people oppressed by the rich elite and corrupt idiots?

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:53 am**

Hammer Britannia wrote:
San Lumen wrote:It is beautiful but there is no reason to break up the state.

Other than the fact that it's filled with innocent people oppressed by the rich elite and corrupt idiots?

I wouldn't say that.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:58 am**

Hammer Britannia wrote:
Geneviev wrote:Yeah, um, as one of the people there, I quite like California. Maybe leave it until June 15. Then I'll be back at home and you can do what you want.

I didn't say it would happen immediately

And Geographically is the worst case scenario

I don't think it will happen or that it should happen. Keep California together.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:10 am**

San Lumen wrote:
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:I'm betting it's about increased division between rural and urban America as of the 2016 election. Not unlike how people have been talking about splitting up Texas.

Whether this division is justified depends on to what extent you blame rural America, urban America, or their refusal to work together. Perhaps splitting them up might serve as a social experiment as to whose ideas work better, and then they can work together on the ideas of the winner, but social experiments are known for sources of error...

Many of the rural parts of the state would unable to sustain themselves without the populous coastal counties.

Well, let's test that theory!

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:10 am**

San Lumen wrote:
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:I'm betting it's about increased division between rural and urban America as of the 2016 election. Not unlike how people have been talking about splitting up Texas.

Whether this division is justified depends on to what extent you blame rural America, urban America, or their refusal to work together. Perhaps splitting them up might serve as a social experiment as to whose ideas work better, and then they can work together on the ideas of the winner, but social experiments are known for sources of error...

Many of the rural parts of the state would unable to sustain themselves without the populous coastal counties.

Well, let's test that theory!

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:13 am**

LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:
San Lumen wrote:Many of the rural parts of the state would unable to sustain themselves without the populous coastal counties.

Well, let's test that theory!

id rather not.

Posted: **Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:15 am**

Hammer Britannia wrote:
San Lumen wrote:It is beautiful but there is no reason to break up the state.

Other than the fact that it's filled with innocent people oppressed by the rich elite and corrupt idiots?

And what oppression would that be?

NationStates

California to Vote on Splitting in Three in November