• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Californians be redistributed?

Should Californians be redistributed to the rest of the states?

  • yes

    Votes: 3 10.3%

  • no

    Votes: 26 89.7%
  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .
Jack Fabulous

Jack Fabulous

Friend Zone
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
16,948
Reaction score
6,740
Location
midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
With all of the hoopla over the popular vote and the electoral college a thought occurred to me. Since California voters made up the bulk of the difference in the popular vote, would the system be more fair if we were to simply redistribute Californians equally to the rest of the states?
 
Jack Fabulous said:
With all of the hoopla over the popular vote and the electoral college a thought occurred to me. Since California voters made up the bulk of the difference in the popular vote, would the system be more fair if we were to simply redistribute Californians equally to the rest of the states?
Click to expand...

As long as it's equal, I'd be OK with it. That would reduce the number of Californians coming here every year. It would also be REALLY entertaining seeing them adjust to life in N. Dakota... :mrgreen:
 
No way, they ruined their own lands, they ruined Colorado, they won't ruin my home!
 
I voted yes. I would like to see them tossed into swing states.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
With all of the hoopla over the popular vote and the electoral college a thought occurred to me. Since California voters made up the bulk of the difference in the popular vote, would the system be more fair if we were to simply redistribute Californians equally to the rest of the states?
Click to expand...

That would likely have won the election for Clinton. About a quarter million more voters each state, 60ish percent voting for Clinton, would have swung some states.
 
If California's population was spread out more, Clinton would likely have won - a lot of the states that went Trump did so by an incredibly narrow margin.

Edit: looks like Redress beat me to it. Never mind.
 
Jesse Booth said:
If California's population was spread out more, Clinton would likely have won - a lot of the states that went Trump did so by an incredibly narrow margin.

Edit: looks like Redress beat me to it. Never mind.
Click to expand...


If they were distributed to states without as large a public tit, they might have to work and pay taxes
 
Redress said:
That would likely have won the election for Clinton. About a quarter million more voters each state, 60ish percent voting for Clinton, would have swung some states.
Click to expand...
Probably. You would have to consider that by doing this California would no longer get their 55(?) EV's.

But yes, states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania most definitely would have swung.
 
Might as well ask if California should be it's own country
 
TurtleDude said:
If they were distributed to states without as large a public tit, they might have to work and pay taxes
Click to expand...

Their unemployment rate is only about 0.4% more than your own state's, and they're beating out my home state (GA) by 0.2%. Do either of us really have room to judge California on this particular problem?
 
Jack Fabulous said:
With all of the hoopla over the popular vote and the electoral college a thought occurred to me. Since California voters made up the bulk of the difference in the popular vote, would the system be more fair if we were to simply redistribute Californians equally to the rest of the states?
Click to expand...

No, build a wall and keep them in, lol.

Same with Texas.
 
Ikari said:
No, build a wall and keep them in, lol.

Same with Texas.
Click to expand...

Yes this! Last thing I need is the whacky left coming East.... and their driving! Winter would be blood spattered death roads up and down 95.
 
Jesse Booth said:
Their unemployment rate is only about 0.4% more than your own state's, and they're beating out my home state (GA) by 0.2%. Do either of us really have room to judge California on this particular problem?
Click to expand...

well answer this-why was California's voting patterns an aberration compared to the rest of the country. Is it that the state attracts people attached to the public umbilical cord at rates far higher than other states or is it that the government out there has spent decades creating Dem-bots?
 
trblmkr said:
7th largest economy in the world, contributes more to the country than any other three or four states combined. Ohio would have to carry it's own weight.
Click to expand...

actually it sucks up lots of tax dollars from both its top citizens and the federal government

but answer this-what caused california to be such a Hillary loving state
 
TurtleDude said:
well answer this-why was California's voting patterns an aberration compared to the rest of the country. Is it that the state attracts people attached to the public umbilical cord at rates far higher than other states or is it that the government out there has spent decades creating Dem-bots?
Click to expand...

If I had to guess, it's because California is extremely urbanized, with a whopping 95% of their population living in an urban environment, as of 2010 (Ohio and Georgia are both sitting at around 75% give or take). I've noticed that people from big cities are way more likely to be liberal than people from the country, but that's just my personal observation on the matter - I haven't actually looked at any studies on the matter.
 
trblmkr said:
7th largest economy in the world, contributes more to the country than any other three or four states combined. Ohio would have to carry it's own weight.
Click to expand...

Current 2020 census projections show the following states LOSING one house seat: OH, MI, PA, RI, AL, IL, WV, MN, and NY--a total of 9 seats flipping. Gaining are TX +3, FL +2, and the following +1: OR, CO, AZ, and NC .
 
Jesse Booth said:
If California's population was spread out more, Clinton would likely have won - a lot of the states that went Trump did so by an incredibly narrow margin.

Edit: looks like Redress beat me to it. Never mind.
Click to expand...

And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
 
No because a disproportionate number of them are illegal immigrants that were promised safe harbor in California. And don't get me started on the social justice warriors who would run rampant if they aren't kept in check by California's comfortable climate.
 
Jesse Booth said:
I was just answering a hypothetical question with a hypothetical possibility. If you really want to complain about what-ifs, you should be quoting the OP, not me.
Click to expand...

I was just dicking with you. :2razz:

Anyways I say no. Sure California had a much larger percentage of votes for Clinton they also cast the largest number of electoral college votes for her as well. I don't think there's a problem.
 
trblmkr said:
For many, maybe not so much loving Hillary as freaked out over trump.
Click to expand...

california-for at least a couple decades-has become the most bot like state when it comes to voting Democrat. When Diane Feinstein is the "conservative" senator from a state you know something is screwed up. and why would California be more freaked out about Trump than other states unless there are lots of illegals voting there?
 
Redress said:
That would likely have won the election for Clinton. About a quarter million more voters each state, 60ish percent voting for Clinton, would have swung some states.
Click to expand...

I don't think the redistribution plan would allow California to remain solidly Democrat, so you get tossed to the swing states in enough numbers to put the 55 electoral votes in jeopardy. :mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom