One of the potential problems with state secession is it would bring in more terrible Senators. A Senator from a red/purple Cascadia would most likely be in the mold of Mitt Romney. I wouldn't have high hopes for Illinois either as a lot of their reps outside the Chicago metro are buffoons like Adam Kinzinger. Peeling off western Virginia into West Virginia could be a mixed bag, Virginia would never be in play statewide again, but would maybe result in two more automatic electoral votes for West Virginia. I also saw a proposal to peel off the bottom row of counties in Minnesota and have them join Iowa, which isn't a huge population shift, but would be good for them.
The strategy is still worth considering and pursuing where it makes sense though. Beyond the politics, there are real people living in these areas getting dominated by urban liberals who despise them. They should be encouraged to make better lives for themselves and their posterity.
All of this is new to southerners. Secession is legal? Is that why the federal government has Abe Lincoln's big old monument in DC at the same time they're tearing down and removing southern historical monuments? When Robert E. Lee refused to become the General in Lincoln's army he stated that he would not fight against Virginia, his "country".
After states split and break apart will the central government still be able to draft young men in every state to force them to be cannon fodder for Israel or will the states have the power to say no?
Isn't the central government run by Jews still the problem here? Will states be allowed to have their own banks and create their own currency? Will each state control it's own public airwaves and broadcast according to the local population to get the facts we need to know in order that we may govern ourselves rather than the Hidden Hand controlling all the information that the people get?
If splitting a state so that one part is red and the other is blue were a threat to the international tribe of billionaires who control everything do you think the central gov would allow it? We have a God given and a Constitutional right to dissolve the central government which was created by the states and institute a new one or not. The central gov does not represent us and is so big that they don't even know what agencies that they are funding. Not Constitutional.
Reynolds v Sims was a really queer decision. As Mr Brimelow notes the judges said that for state legislatures both houses had to be drawn up based solely on population because of the 14th Anendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Of course that isn’t true for the federal government, where the Senate is based on the man made and historical determinations of state boundaries, regardless of the populations of each individual state. So are counties in a state by the way, which was the typical way state senators were chosen.
(Baker v Carr was the root of the problem, because that 1962 decision overturned precedent which denied the court jurisdiction in apportionment cases. They were reserved for the “political” branch — the legislature and the people. And once they arrogated that right to the judicial branch, all the other nonsense with redistricting followed.)
So the Supreme Court held that what was good enough for the US government as determined by the Constitution was not good enough — was unconstitutional in fact — for the states because of a clause in an Amendment that was interpreted that way by them.
Peter, under those circumstances it is far more likely that a future Supreme Court (Democratic) will find the US Senate unconstitutional and mandate apportionment of Senate seats by population than that it will tolerate secession.
3) If every vote in the Middle East was equal, Israel would not exist, It does exist because there are national boundaries. Arguably, U.S. state boundaries no longer reflect the legitimate communities within them.
Where did that 5 come from (lol sp?). No, Trump did NOT win a majority of the vote - more than 50% of the votes were for other people. There was not a vote in the middle east. I have no idea what point your hypothetical is trying to make that refutes/adds to/ detracts from what I posted. Thanks for your attention.
One of the potential problems with state secession is it would bring in more terrible Senators. A Senator from a red/purple Cascadia would most likely be in the mold of Mitt Romney. I wouldn't have high hopes for Illinois either as a lot of their reps outside the Chicago metro are buffoons like Adam Kinzinger. Peeling off western Virginia into West Virginia could be a mixed bag, Virginia would never be in play statewide again, but would maybe result in two more automatic electoral votes for West Virginia. I also saw a proposal to peel off the bottom row of counties in Minnesota and have them join Iowa, which isn't a huge population shift, but would be good for them.
The strategy is still worth considering and pursuing where it makes sense though. Beyond the politics, there are real people living in these areas getting dominated by urban liberals who despise them. They should be encouraged to make better lives for themselves and their posterity.
The real point, as you say, is to rescue real Americans from Leftist state government oppression.
Depending on how the states are redivided, it might not affect U.S. Senate representation at all.
So true. Always early, always right.
Thanks Kate
All of this is new to southerners. Secession is legal? Is that why the federal government has Abe Lincoln's big old monument in DC at the same time they're tearing down and removing southern historical monuments? When Robert E. Lee refused to become the General in Lincoln's army he stated that he would not fight against Virginia, his "country".
After states split and break apart will the central government still be able to draft young men in every state to force them to be cannon fodder for Israel or will the states have the power to say no?
Isn't the central government run by Jews still the problem here? Will states be allowed to have their own banks and create their own currency? Will each state control it's own public airwaves and broadcast according to the local population to get the facts we need to know in order that we may govern ourselves rather than the Hidden Hand controlling all the information that the people get?
If splitting a state so that one part is red and the other is blue were a threat to the international tribe of billionaires who control everything do you think the central gov would allow it? We have a God given and a Constitutional right to dissolve the central government which was created by the states and institute a new one or not. The central gov does not represent us and is so big that they don't even know what agencies that they are funding. Not Constitutional.
Reynolds v Sims was a really queer decision. As Mr Brimelow notes the judges said that for state legislatures both houses had to be drawn up based solely on population because of the 14th Anendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Of course that isn’t true for the federal government, where the Senate is based on the man made and historical determinations of state boundaries, regardless of the populations of each individual state. So are counties in a state by the way, which was the typical way state senators were chosen.
(Baker v Carr was the root of the problem, because that 1962 decision overturned precedent which denied the court jurisdiction in apportionment cases. They were reserved for the “political” branch — the legislature and the people. And once they arrogated that right to the judicial branch, all the other nonsense with redistricting followed.)
So the Supreme Court held that what was good enough for the US government as determined by the Constitution was not good enough — was unconstitutional in fact — for the states because of a clause in an Amendment that was interpreted that way by them.
Peter, under those circumstances it is far more likely that a future Supreme Court (Democratic) will find the US Senate unconstitutional and mandate apportionment of Senate seats by population than that it will tolerate secession.
Hello 100 California Senators!
America isn't a "sinking ship" it is a "SUNK ship" I hate to say. We the people are fat, happy and lazy and impotent - so here we are unfortunately.
miracles happen quite often in politics
Except doesn't the Congress that you discount in your second bullet point have to approve such redrawing of state boundaries?
yes, but it doesn't require as much courage as confronting REYNOLDS head on
You cowards who are afraid of the people and bow down to 5the elite are pitiful. What nonsense you spew. Each voter is equal.
1) 5the elite???
2) Trump won a majority of the popular vote.
3) If every vote in the Middle East was equal, Israel would not exist, It does exist because there are national boundaries. Arguably, U.S. state boundaries no longer reflect the legitimate communities within them.
P.S. You are in favor of putting 4/5ths of a person back into our Constitution?
Where did that 5 come from (lol sp?). No, Trump did NOT win a majority of the vote - more than 50% of the votes were for other people. There was not a vote in the middle east. I have no idea what point your hypothetical is trying to make that refutes/adds to/ detracts from what I posted. Thanks for your attention.