Aug 31, 2025 06:53 AM
Aug 31, 2025 07:31 PM
Quote:The so-called two-state solution would split the state vertically with the Bay Area and all but one coastal county. In the west, including LA, Santa Barbara, San Diego.
This would represent about 3/4 of California's population. To the east, most of the inland areas, northern California, the Sierra Nevada, Central Valley, and Southern California's Inland Empire, about 10 million Californians.
Today, state Republicans said that the split would give rural voters a voice, which they say will be silenced if the new redrawn congressional maps are approved by voters in the November 4th special election.
One of the authors there, James Gallagher of Northern California, said that the imp this impacts water rights, the price of fuel,
firefighting resources, the battle between ranchers and environmentalists, and so on.
Governor Gavin Newsome's master plan to gerrymander California's congressional maps has just backfired. And now the Democratic Party is really worried that a new two-state solution could split California into two separate states.
Now, that move comes from a local Republican representative serving in California's legislature and sparks new concerns that Newsome's plan uh might not have worked out so well. The radical left governor has been spending millions of dollars for years trying to convince voters that for one, he's doing a good job and more recently convincing voters to vote to abolish the existing congressional maps that were previously established by an independent bipartisan commission.
In other words, he wants to bypass the process and draw his own maps that give the Democratic Party as many representatives as possible.
Somewhat related proposals for expanding the state of Idaho to include parts of Oregon and Northern California have floated listlessly for decades(?), although the Greater Idaho movement actually has had some activity in the last five years.
Every week there is some sensationalist YouTube channel proclaiming that the succession of western provinces from Canada is imminent within days or weeks, but it's always failed fantasy. The idea has gotten some legitimate push this year, but just like the "Quebec sovereignty movement" dating back to even before the 1960s, Canadians ultimately have a fatalistic attitude about changing anything concerning their current or oncoming circumstances. Analogous to constant talk about leaving the family farm located on cheap property by the river, but the MacDonalds instead always put up with the flooding.
It's usually sound to attribute the same fatalism to "rural" Californians. Outcries and vengeful promises of breaking free of the Neolithic pit with the fence around it, that the ocean-side people and glitterati poke or squat through to regularly pee on them. But in the end, it's stone tools (fewer numbers) against modern instruments.
Aug 31, 2025 08:11 PM
Yeah, I figured it was pie in the sky. And typical leftist hypocrisy, like building walled, private communities and then demanding open borders.
Sep 1, 2025 06:26 AM
I'm a Californian and I'd love to see this happen. Unfortunately for me, I'd remain in even bluer coastal California.
But California already is effectively two states politically, culturally and economically. The coastal counties (plus Sacramento and some inland Bay Area counties like Santa Clara and Alameda) are already so blue as to be almost ultraviolet. The population of these counties aren't really Californians at all, they are mostly people who moved to California from somewhere else. (In the past people moved to California from other states, today it's mostly from other countries.)
Inland California is where you find people actually born in the state. It's poorer, often working class, and short of celebrities. The north state up to the Oregon line, the Central Valley (with the exception of the state capital) and the Sierra Nevada are largely red counties that went for Trump. The LA area is interesting in that Riverside and San Bernardino are heavily populated urban counties (with huge desert areas as well, San Bernardino county has 20,000 square miles) and Trump carried both of them in 2024. Interestingly Imperial county, which is 85% Hispanic and where Calexico is effectively a suburb of Mexicali Mexico, went for Trump as well! (Which surprised everyone. It shows that the democrats' strategy of opening the border to appeal to Hispanics backfired on them both here and in the Rio Grande valley where the Hispanic population also went for Trump.)
If the state were split, the blues would get the beaches and beach resorts, the redwoods and Big Sur. The reds would get Mt. Shasta, Lassen, Yosemite, the High Sierra alpine areas, Lake Tahoe, the gold rush towns, the giant sequoias, Death Valley, Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks, Joshua Tree and the Mojave desert.
I like the idea of splitting the state into red and blue counties, but sadly it has about zero chance of ever happening.
Actually, there are quite a few states divided like California is. I still remember being struck by how most of the land area of Illinois is red farming counties... and ultraviolet Cook county (Chicago) which dominates and politically controls the whole state. Illinois could easily be split in two. If you took away Chicago, the rest of Illinois would vote like neighboring Missouri and Indiana.
New York is split between New York City (bright blue and in some boroughs ultraviolet) and often-forgotten upstate New York with most of the state's land area. Many counties up there are bright red (though Buffalo and Rochester are blue). But if you took away NYC, then the rest of New York state would vote very similar to neighboring Pennsylvania which Trump carried in 2024.
But California already is effectively two states politically, culturally and economically. The coastal counties (plus Sacramento and some inland Bay Area counties like Santa Clara and Alameda) are already so blue as to be almost ultraviolet. The population of these counties aren't really Californians at all, they are mostly people who moved to California from somewhere else. (In the past people moved to California from other states, today it's mostly from other countries.)
Inland California is where you find people actually born in the state. It's poorer, often working class, and short of celebrities. The north state up to the Oregon line, the Central Valley (with the exception of the state capital) and the Sierra Nevada are largely red counties that went for Trump. The LA area is interesting in that Riverside and San Bernardino are heavily populated urban counties (with huge desert areas as well, San Bernardino county has 20,000 square miles) and Trump carried both of them in 2024. Interestingly Imperial county, which is 85% Hispanic and where Calexico is effectively a suburb of Mexicali Mexico, went for Trump as well! (Which surprised everyone. It shows that the democrats' strategy of opening the border to appeal to Hispanics backfired on them both here and in the Rio Grande valley where the Hispanic population also went for Trump.)
If the state were split, the blues would get the beaches and beach resorts, the redwoods and Big Sur. The reds would get Mt. Shasta, Lassen, Yosemite, the High Sierra alpine areas, Lake Tahoe, the gold rush towns, the giant sequoias, Death Valley, Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks, Joshua Tree and the Mojave desert.
I like the idea of splitting the state into red and blue counties, but sadly it has about zero chance of ever happening.
Actually, there are quite a few states divided like California is. I still remember being struck by how most of the land area of Illinois is red farming counties... and ultraviolet Cook county (Chicago) which dominates and politically controls the whole state. Illinois could easily be split in two. If you took away Chicago, the rest of Illinois would vote like neighboring Missouri and Indiana.
New York is split between New York City (bright blue and in some boroughs ultraviolet) and often-forgotten upstate New York with most of the state's land area. Many counties up there are bright red (though Buffalo and Rochester are blue). But if you took away NYC, then the rest of New York state would vote very similar to neighboring Pennsylvania which Trump carried in 2024.
Sep 1, 2025 07:02 AM
Yeah, Democrats in high density cities overwhelm the votes in many states, just like their crime rates do state crime stats.