Advertisement
by Thermodolia » 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?
by Thermodolia » Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:23 pm
by Salus Maior » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:16 pm
by Mujahidah » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:39 pm
by San Lumen » 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.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Sat Apr 14, 2018 8:52 am
New Emeline wrote:Why do they want to do this?
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by San Lumen » 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...
by Benjabobaria » 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.
San Lumen wrote:Water rights could be another sticking point.
by San Lumen » 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
by Telconi » 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
by Hammer Britannia » Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:16 am
by Geneviev » 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)
by Hammer Britannia » 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.
by Hammer Britannia » Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:48 am
by Hammer Britannia » Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:52 am
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » 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.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » 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.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Vassenor » Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:15 am
Users browsing this forum: Autumn Wind, Bienenhalde, Cyptopir, Deblar, Emotional Support Crocodile, Ferelith, Hekp, Jerzylvania, Nippon-Nihon, Port Carverton, Stratonesia, Thermodolia, Uvolla