In Ecotopia, Ernest Callenbach tells the tale of a West Coast utopia that secedes from a nation consumed by capitalistic greed. According to Callenbach’s vision, Northern California joins Washington and Oregon in seceding from the United States, essentially writing off Los Angeles as a car-obsessed bubble of heathens. While maybe the car-obsessed thing hasn’t changed, the prevailing attitude of young Los Angelenos has...That reminds me: "It's Official: Clinton's Popular Vote Win Came Entirely From California."
Fast-forward to 2016, and much like the book prophesied, we have a state that is directly at odds with the rest of the nation....
If you take California out of the popular vote equation, then Trump wins the rest of the country by 1.4 million votes. And if California voted like every other Democratic state — where Clinton averaged 53.5% wins — Clinton and Trump end up in a virtual popular vote tie.
Posts
222 comments:
1 – 200 of 222 Newer› Newest»Take out all the illegals and she loses the PV with CA.
Althouse, it's been done. here's the link to Mexifornia by VDH (via your portal)
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_2_5?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=mexifornia+by+victor+davis+hanson&sprefix=mexif%2Caps%2C160&crid=3U2VD82KRHTC1
Seriously though, this native Californian (living in Virginia) thinks that as CA bleeds ir's middle class it turns into Guatemala. Rich people with their own hired guns, living in walled compounds and poor brown people picking fruit, and climbing the walls of compounds. Third world redux.
Didn't we have a big hooptedoo 150 years ago that permanently settled the question of whether states could seceed?
Hooptedoo = War Between the States
Fwiw, I do think they should but I've always been in a small minority on this.
John Henry
I hope the movement succeeds. Make sure we get their portion of the $20 trillion of debt prior to their departure, as in the Hotel California.
If they do we should immediately build a wall to keep all the illegals IN!
The people can leave the country. The land stays.
We shouldn't just let Californians have California, but we should consider selling it to them. That way we could pay down some of the national debt, which they helped run up in the first place.
So in the US ex California, it seems like the Republican Party would be pretty dominant, other things remaining equal. Bad news for Democrats outside of CA. Meanwhile there would be no pressure on the rest of the country to conform to CA standards on environmental issues, textbooks, etc.
Hmmmm . . .
California, on the other hand, would get to face its underfunded pension nightmare alone, but could print enough California Pesos to inflate its way out of the problem.
Hahaha.
Look at the words. How cute it is, for California, to talk about "independence," with hopeful and "progressive" values, replete with allusions to the American Declaration of Independence.
Compare, to how the liberal press treated discussions of Texas doing the same thing in the era of Obama. It wasn't "independence"; it was "secession." And not allusions to our sainted Revolutionary War, but instead the Civil War.
Rick Perry was ridiculed for even a mention of the topic. Perhaps rightly, I won't judge. But there can be no explaining why the writer of this online column shouldn't get the Rick Perry ridicule treatment.
Re Clinton's majority it is not California. Take LA county votes ot of the mix and the election was basically a tie.
Take Cook County (Chicago) out too and Trump had a majority in the popular vote.
John Henry
A good example of what I was talking about:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/us/politics/18texas.html
Would the Marines at Pendleton have to fight their way out? Kind of a reverse Sherman, a march from the sea.
And the Navy would have to set up an informal blockade or something, not so much to keep our new neighbor in as to keep foreign predators out. I'm not a military strategist but I somehow doubt we'd be willing to have such a large portion of coastline vulnerable to invasion. Because the Russians have been in California before, yes?
The Russians, always the Russians. But it might be the Chinese. Or maybe the militias up in Idaho and Montana would come down the I-15 and mount a counter-coup.
I've been thinking of "Ecotopia" for a few weeks now. This will be interesting.
CA doesn't have uniform politics, though. If it tried to secede, it would break apart.
Looks like our services will not be needed, Meade. Californians are going to do it without our help.
Hope you've got that Secretary of Agriculture gig to fall back on.
China should trade in a credit on our debt and buy Mexifornia at auction. Then they will dispute with us about respecting our One USA policy.
I always thought the Articles of Confederation superior to the United States Constitution. Add in the Bill if Rights and it's a no brainer.
I hear about is strange activity at Ft. Ross that is going in the Russian River towards the Sevastopol area.
Putin wants his Sonoma County back.
CA cannot leave the union without a constitutional amandment to define such a process. See SCOTUS decision in Texas Vs Whie (1869) written by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase.
@MaxedOutMama, that's bad because why?
Chuck- you are absolutely right about the difference in treatment of Texas compared to California.
"CA cannot leave the union without a constitutional amandment to define such a process."
So 3/4ths of the states would have to agree? I don't foresee much of a problem...
Would New California have open borders?
If we're going to sell California we should open it up for bidding. Maybe the Israelis would buy it so they could get the heck out of the middle east.
I have a better idea. Instead of California leaving, we do one of those police stings where they contact wanted men and tell them they won a prize, come pick it up. We should tell Californians to come to certain convention centers to sign the session petition and, when they're all inside, lock the doors and subject them to a civics lesson on what it means to be a citizen in a demcracy. (Yes, I know, we're a republic. Save your keystrokes, pedant.)
As long as we are dealing with hypotheticals, what would the result of the electoral vote have been if the number of electors was tied to population; i.e., no minimum of three per state. Now, California gets one elector vote per 700,000 and Wyoming gets one per 200,000. Is that fair?
A delusional fantasy from the creators of fantasy.
We'd have to have strict immigration restriction regarding all those California libtards who will eventually want to decamp from their utopia. (We might allow them to pass through on their way to Canada. Not that Canada will want them.)
As a matter of fact, we should set up return and repatriation conditions for all the California libtards who fled their utopia in the last 30 years or so, who've fucked up every nice place they moved to (because they're too stupid to understand how and why California got so fucked up they had to flee).
I've lived all my life in California, hearing only that the state leads the way . . . While the public education system has gone from best to worst in the U.S, while the cost of living is driving the middle class out, while income inequality has surged to become the highest in the U.S. So we are leading the way, but that is nothing to be proud of. I read the article and was not impressed. Californians are not willing to pay higher taxes - they are willing to make other people (the rich) pay higher taxes. I don't see any Californians employed renovating buildings so they are green. This is not an environmental utopia, and no amount of "climate change" regulation will make it so. Politically, opposition to the rest of the U.S. seems the best path for us. Self righteousness is fun and feels good. If California actually was a nation, it would become indistinguishable from Mexico in 6 months or a year, and vulnerable to military conquest by any country with men who are not New Age Nitwits. A Third World country that cannot defend itself.
If California is going to break off, there should be a vote. LA and SF would go left. Much of the rest would stay put.
A better scenario would be a giant earthquake that breaks off the coastal areas of those three states and sends them out to sea [after my kids and grandkids escape, that is!]. Most of the counties in WA and OR are red and don't deserve this fate.
Mountain man: A constitutional amendment to let California exit would be easy to obtain. Most of the other states would be more than happy to ratify it.
California resembles New York City and the Copperheads in the Civil War.
The leftist enclaves are actually rather small although I was shocked to see Orange County go for Hillary this time.
The agricultural center of the state is being destroyed by the coastal idiots.
I have been complaining about teh Jerry Brown train to nowhere which is now at $64 billion and climbing. I thought the money would be much better spent on desalination plants which could end the drought in the southern part of the state. Then an article in the LA Times yesterday about a new huge desalination plant that has been trying to get approval drew a letter from an environmentalist who opposes i because the desalination process would such in sea life with the salt water.
That decides it. THe state is doomed by the idiots who inhabit it.
Won't geology settle this issue for us in the future?
Some 46% of California — 71,663.75 square miles — is Federal lands. Does anyone expect the Federal government to simply resign title to those lands, just because the state of California unilaterally declares itself independent? But if it retains them, then California will be quite a patchwork. Moreover, the counties in the center and north of California for the most part voted for Trump — in the extreme northeast of the state by a proportion of greater than 70%. Surely those counties should be allowed to opt out of any secession of California from the Union.
States already exist that seem to have very separate policy and aims of self-interest from supporting solar to extending Medicare to pushing coal and the subsequent increase in black lung. Note the high rate of drug addiction, poor health and divorce in some of the Southern states that bleed red. But two can play the game of different scenarios: take out the unprecedented Comey announcement eleven days before the election, the meddling of James Dowson's Patriot News, the Russian effect and the race, as I predicted, becomes a toss-up. But anyway you slice it Trump does not have a mandate.
Won't geology settle this issue for us in the future?
I.e., won't California just drop into the sea one fine day? No.
MountainMan said...
CA cannot leave the union without a constitutional amandment to define such a process. See SCOTUS decision in Texas Vs Whi[t]e (1869) written by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase.
The attempt at reasoning by those government lawyers is pretty amusing:
- The "Articles of Confederation" used the word "perpetual".
- The preamble of the Constitution says "form a more perfect Union", and the only way to be more perfect is to be perpetual.
Have a laugh -
"And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?"
The case was actually about money; someone else can "follow the money" to find the motivation for writing and then pretending to believe such obvious nonsense.
Althouse is a funny blog. You know that she would take it personally if you asked whether there was any rational thought process to determining what gets blogged about. And yet, here we are. Debating and pontificating on a ludicrous California secessionist idea that will never happen. With a commentariat just as devoted to bullshit about how mass transit is wrong and humans and the atmosphere are both incapable of affecting the environment.
That decides it. THe state is doomed by the idiots who inhabit it.
If only they could have grown up with nursemaids. The sea water is meant for no other purpose than to nourish us, like our nursemaid's sweet, ever-flowing milk! Screw the sea life! What grows in the oceans anyway! Nothing that we depend on, certainly!
Way back in the 1970s, New York magazine said that New York City should secede and become the 51st state.
And, of course, there's been a movement in far northern California to secede from the state and become the new state of Jefferson (perhaps including parts of what are now Oregon).
In Joel Garreau's 1981 The Nine Nations of North America, one of the nations was called Ecotopia and extended from Anchorage to mid-California, but never got more than a hundred or so miles from the left coast.
Talk about Russian driven fake news. The president of California Exit is an American living in Russia. There have been 3-4 articles in the Sac Bee on Calexit. It probably won't qualify for the ballot. If it did might get 20% in favor.
It's a stupid idea from short sighted sore losers.
The US would dictate terms in any secession. Any locality that voted to stay in the US could. CA's food and water sources for the most part would still be American. The Colorado would be used to irrigate American farms. California would be a thin strip of coastal land with lots of desal plants.
Ah, it's only because they're on the far left.
Try making Nebraska a sovereign nation. That'd be a hoot!
Thank you for your daily load of whinging butthurt, r/v.
When Texas joined the United States, all of the Republic's public defense armament and facilities were ceded to the United States. That is, the former Republic no longer had an army or navy.
Will California oblige the United States by giving all port facilites, air facilities, military bases and materials of war back to the US before the doorknob hits them in the ass? Leaving an armed and antagonistic nation on the border of Nevada makes no sense to me.
Blogger Anglelyne said...
We'd have to have strict immigration restriction regarding all those California libtards who will eventually want to decamp from their utopia. (We might allow them to pass through on their way to Canada. Not that Canada will want them.)
How would you do that? The people in the new independent state of California would still be US citizens. As such they would have free right of entry into the US, just the same as you or I would if we lived in Canada. How would you restrict entry to the US by US citizens?
Their children, by virtue of being born to US citizens would be citizens too, though that would be easy to change by statute. Would not need an Amendment.
If the US citizens living in the independent state of California could not pass along their US citizenship to their children, it would be easy enough to mosey across the border to Arizona, Nevada or Oregon to have the baby. That baby would then be a natural born US citizen.
Or maybe pass a Constitutional Amendment that all persons living in the independent state of California would lose their US citizenship. Do that and there would be a flood of people moving to the other 49 states from California.
Citizenship will be a very tricky question in this.
John Henry
Hey, California, I have a compromise to offer on this exit/independence thing.
Instead of you officially breaking away, you can stay nominally part of the United States but we'll let you make basically all your own decisions. In fact, as long as the states don't violate some basic civil rights we all agree on, we can all pretty much go our own way.
We'll keep a common currency, no barriers to trade and movement among the states. The federal government will provide for the common defense and handle only those tasks that it's uniquely able and authorized to handle.
Gosh - if only we already had some sort of document in place spelling out such an arrangement, then you might not feel the need to declare your independence.
Awww.... do you like r/v's (sore?) butt, Paco? My impression is he's just reminding people of Trump's inability to get a majority of voters (even in the age of voter suppression!) to choose him. But then, informed people already knew this. Even Republicans.
Never before have I seen such a scrawny chest get so loudly beaten. We won! (While losing anything close to a "mandate." Sssshhhhh! Don't tell anyone! This secret needs better suppression. Apparently Trump was only allowed to be a contentious and polarizing figure within his party. The rest of the country is allowed no such opinion. Suppress them!
Rhythm and Balls said...
Althouse is a funny blog. You know that she would take it personally if you asked whether there was any rational thought process to determining what gets blogged about. And yet, here we are. Debating and pontificating on a ludicrous California secessionist idea that will never happen. With a commentariat just as devoted to bullshit about how mass transit is wrong and humans and the atmosphere are both incapable of affecting the environment.
This is such bullshit. Above, I posted just one New York Times link on the subject of "Texas secession." If you Google-search nytimes for the terms "texas," "secession," and "Rick Perry," you'll find at least eight Times links to that story. That story was ALL OVER the national media.
And I confess to feeling as you do; Damn you, trying to make out a case for one entire side of the political spectrum based on the unserious musings of one tiny subset of that side...a "secessionist idea that will never happen."
So yeah, there is that.
As for mass transit, I don't want to wait for a train or a bus if I don't have to, and I don't want any more bloated transit worker unions, pumping money into Democrat campaigns, than is absolutely necessary. My idea of mass transit is a Lexus driven by an Uber driver. Or maybe piloted by a Google computer.
And as for global warming, I expect that maybe we as humans really CAN change the environment. I sure hope so, so that we can develop technology to capture carbon if we wish, or raise or lower temperatures as best suits us. We might want that, if someday we are looking at another ice age. And beating our chests right now about what sort of mileage our SUV's get is mere foolishness.
One of the things that has been lost in the past hundred or so years is the understanding of the word "State"
Our founders understood it clearly. It used to mean and still does mean, a separate, independent country. We still refer to the leaders of countries as being "heads of state", Coup d'etat and so on.
We fuzzed it up here to where many people can't tell the difference between a state and a province.
A province is an subordinate part of a state.
The US govt is, by design, a subordinate tool of the individual states.
We were named the United States and not the United provinces, counties, shires or whatsits for a reason.
John Henry
"Althouse is a funny blog. You know that she would take it personally if you asked whether there was any rational thought process to determining what gets blogged about. And yet, here we are."
You're forced to be here?
If you look at the number of counties that Trump won compared to Hillary, it is very lopsided in Trumps favor.
If CA leaves the Union, then Colorado can stop sending them water, the rest of US can stop sending them electricity and oil and gas and natural gas. The US could also require a Passport for entry to the US. I see it as a win win situation.
As for mass transit, I don't want to wait for a train or a bus if I don't have to,
So don't wait for one, asshole. Wait an extra two hours in an airport terminal, instead FFS. Get felt up by TSA and have them laughing at the X-Ray scattershot of your puny pee-pee. Knock yourself out.
..and I don't want any more bloated transit worker unions, pumping money into Democrat campaigns, than is absolutely necessary.
Updating infrastructure is always necessary.
My idea of mass transit is a Lexus driven by an Uber driver.
Talk about an out-of touch asshole. Do people pull up alongside asking if you have any Grey Poupon?
Or maybe piloted by a Google computer.
What Google will be really good at is telling laid-off truck drivers directions to your property so that they can flop on it.
And as for global warming, I expect that maybe we as humans really CAN change the environment.
Lol. What an achievement. In between Chernobyl, Cleveland's river catching fire and the 6th great extinction, an anonymous internet jerk-off starts to "expect" that the causes of these things might actually be real.
I sure hope so, so that we can develop technology to capture carbon if we wish, or raise or lower temperatures as best suits us.
I'm sure that if that's the marketing campaign that Exxon Mobil sell to you, you will believe it. Whatever they say is the next big thing is what you're on board with. It's nice to know who owns your headspace.
We might want that, if someday we are looking at another ice age.
Far-off and irrelevant pontification is necessary for Exxon Mobil to have such enthusiastic unpaid lobbyists as yourself.
And beating our chests right now about what sort of mileage our SUV's get is mere foolishness.
I'm glad you threw this ninny opinion into your manifesto. It was starting to get bogged down with too many facts.
You're forced to be here?
Are you forced to read (or lack the comprehension to read) what I wrote?
R&B said
(While losing anything close to a "mandate."
See the map of county results here: http://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M3356fb536ce56c1d987ab3c74007d32fo0&w=257&h=173&c=7&rs=1&qlt=90&o=4&pid=1.1
Pretty wide distribution of Red
Or take LA and Cook counties out and Trumps gets a nice popular majority
Or look at state govts. Only 6 states, IIRC, have dem gov and both houses. 30 or so have R gov and both houses of legislature.
Yeah, it feels like a mandate.
John Henry
Blogger roesch/voltaire said...
[If you]
1) take out the unprecedented Comey announcement eleven days before the election,
AND
2) the meddling of James Dowson's Patriot News,
AND
3) the Russian effect ...
THEN
the race, as I predicted, becomes a toss-up.
Wow, you're a regular precog.
"California has been turning into what amounts to a one-party state. Between 2008 and 2016, the number of Californian's who registered as Democrats climbed by 1.1 million, while the number of registered Republicans dropped by almost 400,000.
What's more, many Republicans in the state had nobody to vote for in November.
There were two Democrats — and zero Republicans — running to replace Sen. Barbara Boxer. There were no Republicans on the ballot for House seats in nine of California's congressional districts.
At the state level, six districts had no Republicans running for the state senate, and 16 districts had no Republicans running for state assembly seats."
Dysfunction and dictatorship - hollywood approved.
Create the "State of Jefferson" at the top, let the rest of the state break off and float over to North Korea. North Korean elections will forever give the left the candidate they like.
California has been turning into what amounts to a one-party state.
What are you bitching about? America has finally been turned into the one-party COUNTRY these people have been aiming to make it into.
California does better on so many scores than the vast majority of states. Save for the consequences of man-made global environmental disasters which go beyond California's ability to stop.
@John Henry: I don't understand your 10:08 post. California would be leaving the Union.
Pretty wide distribution of Red
Or take LA and Cook counties out and Trumps gets a nice popular majority
Or look at state govts. Only 6 states, IIRC, have dem gov and both houses. 30 or so have R gov and both houses of legislature.
Yeah, it feels like a mandate.
John Henry
And I'm sure a whore's lips on your "John Henry" feel to you like love.
Keep telling us about your "feelings." The fucking FACTS are that you ran a phony populist progressive who promised to bring manufacturing back to states that had lost them against a corporatist. Trump won 2-time Obama voters and Hillary couldn't get out the vote. The rest of your stupid, divided party rode off of his coattails. Those are the facts. 2.5 million less votes is no mandate, dummy. Winning off of voter suppression and voter apathy is no mandate. You pricks are desperate to spin this as anything other than a call to burn down the Democratic party into the progressive faction that would have whupped your ass. Ask yourself if America actually believes in GOP congressional "leadership." They are counting on Trump to do progressive things - the things he promised. You are hilarious.
Actually I think Cooperations will set up their own fiefdoms with private armies etc.They will become more international than national willing to do business and influence any "state" they deal with. Most services etc will be "privatized" and in control of the corporations that reach across any so-called state borders. For a glimpse into our future, I like Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson as a more possible scenario.
Blowhard talk from the same kind of nuts that talk about Texas secession. If they actually tried it, the moment it was announced the federals should roll in, arrest everyone involved and put the state under martial law (say for the same decade or so as the last states that tried to secede).
Can't do anything about state elections, I guess (not being Democrats), but the Congress should act to make it illegal to have more than one person on a federal ballot from one party. What CA has done is real voter suppression. You can still have your jungle primary but you have to skip down to the first person who's not a democrat for the second spot.
r/v: But two can play the game of different scenarios: take out the unprecedented Comey announcement eleven days before the election, the meddling of James Dowson's Patriot News, the Russian effect and the race, as I predicted, becomes a toss-up.
r/v, while your comments were always heavy on the pissy and sniffy, I seem to recall that they used occasionally to contain a dash of something beyond sour, recycled DNC-issued piss-and-snit. Perhaps I'm misremembering.
"James Dowson's Patriot News". Lol. Had to look that one up. The NYT (date: today) solemnly informs me that this site I never heard of is a terrifyingly influential foreign-devil meddler "whose postings were viewed and shared tens of thousands of times in the United States". Tens of thousands!. (Most of whom were probably HuffPo, Slate, and Salon readers.)
Thanks for alerting me to this topic, r/v, as an example of how the "prestige" press has decided to go full clown-show in their flailing desperation. At this point I wouldn't be surprised to click-over to the NYT or WaPo one day soon and find myself confronted with screaming, multi-colored, pulsating early '90s shit-level web-design - as would be appropriate for conspiracy-sites catering to that part of none-too-bright demo not enjoying robust mental health.
But anyway you slice it Trump does not have a mandate.
No president has had a "mandate" since forever. What's your point? I realize that the crazier sorts of lefties have convinced themselves that it's unconstitutional (or uncivil, or unAmerican, or "divisive", or something) for non-Democrats to make appointments, or pass legislation, or pursue policy goals that the Democrats don't like. Gone down that rabbit hole yourself, have you, r/v?
hythm and Balls said... [hush][hide comment]
As for mass transit, I don't want to wait for a train or a bus if I don't have to,
So don't wait for one, asshole. Wait an extra two hours in an airport terminal, instead FFS. Get felt up by TSA and have them laughing at the X-Ray scattershot of your puny pee-pee. Knock yourself out.
Yep, No chance of a terrorist attack on a 200 mph train with a thousand passengers.How simple to derail that? Followed by same security precautions and delays as airports.
Mandate? There is no mandate. There is only win. Or win not.
John Henry: How would you do that? The people in the new independent state of California would still be US citizens.
I was deadly serious about forcibly repatriating all the pre-secession Californians, too.
But as long as we're sperging out over a joke, like Original Mike @10:29 said.
I don't know FullMoon. I'll leave it to you to focus on terrrrrism as the only issue facing America.
These trains now go over 300 mph. The only dildos opposing them are the flyover kooks who've never witnessed first-hand how life functions in an actually operational, large, successful economy like the Northeast corridor.
No one's asking to put trains in their desserts of civilization. We don't need them to tell us how regional economies that dwarf theirs should function - let alone by entertaining their shit-for-brains ideas on doing away with mass transit.
California does better on so many scores than the vast majority of states. Save for the consequences of man-made global environmental disasters which go beyond California's ability to stop.
Right. They lack the competency to even balance a checkbook.
And I'll also leave you to "think" like a terrrrrrist would. I mean, with a name like that...
As some guy once said, "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
Whatever, boycat of the "Deficits don't matter" party.
Scoreboard, bitches!
Explains how your party got to nominating and (technically) electing someone who ran as a progressive populist - even if we all know he's a phony one.
California does badly in most US public welfare rankings, in spite of superb weather, which I think is a critical factor, and there is a tremendous amount of money in CA, and moreso a huge multi-generational investment in talent and infrastructure beyond any US state.
In spite of this it does, over the greater part of it, work like a third world country.
I have been maintaining a COLA adjusted median household income data series (the same idea as PPP adjustments to compare national economies, a beloved idea of The Economist since the 1970s) since @2002, posted in various places on the internet and subsequently replicated by others. Until recently the table was on the Median Household Income Wiki. California ranks low.
Also telling are NAEP scores, where CA also ranks very low, especially when scores are disassociated by race. CA white students do badly vs national white students, etc. This indicates severe deficiencies in cultural capital in spite of pockets of extreme ability.
Its also not good, though not the worst, in GINI coefficients.
The California secret these days is that its rich parts are extremely wealthy because they are the residence of a huge proportion of the nations rentiers, its owners, both of capital and intellectual properties but also "goodwill" - reputation, custom, etc. - accumulated by the previous generations. But this is a small minority. They are sustained by a larger but still limited class of well paid courtiers (I am one I suppose), and by a large lower class of poorly paid service workers, and the rest consitutes a suppressed peasantry deliberately cut out of the system.
California does badly in most US public welfare rankings, in spite of superb weather, which I think is a critical factor,
California has 12% of the nation's population and a third of its welfare cases. This is a function of California's weather and generous welfare benefits.
Original mike
What do you not understand? Explain to me how us citizens would lose their citizeship for living in a foreign state/country. Or, if an amendment took citizenship away how they could be prevented from moving to another us state before it took effect.
Or perhaps my referring to a seceeded California as an independent "state" confused you. See my 10:36 post about the meaning of the word state.
John Henry
@John Henry - If the rest of the states agreed to let California leave while allowing it's citizens to retain US citizenship, we'd be insane. Would never happen.
They want to leave, they leave all the way.
As to them moving to another state before the doors close, I imagine a lot of them would. In fact, I bet most of them would.
R&B
Thanks for clearing that up. So you feel like Trump doesn't have a mandate. Whoopee!
Let's see you progressives try to stop anything he decides to do.
Why does having or not having a mandate mean anthing at all? He has the power. That's what counts in terms of effectiveness.
John Henry
It's nice that the oh-so-well-educated commenters here can't figure out that the only gripe they have with California - educational "scores" - (and talk about a meaningless metric) - are pretty much 100% predicated on its massive immigrant laborer population.
Keep up the "brain-"storming, guys!
It's not a "feeling," John Henry. And yes, I realize your "side" only navigates the world through your feelings. It's a "fact." No one calls this a mandate - and the piggybacking of that party off of it is pathetic.
Power? Effectiveness?
Just doing shit means nothing. Bush did a lot of shit. And he ruined the country.
You people are corrupt blowhards who value power over what's good for the country. The country will notice. The blocs that gave him the edge have already noted that he's on a tight leash. Hillary hatred is not your magic elixir. She's out; try governing for a change. But then, the Blowhard in Chief isn't even inaugurated yet and he's already populating his cabinet with the same drained swamp that he promised to drain.
He's not even "effective" at keeping his promises before he even gets power.
Just a preview of what's to come.
Rhythm and Balls said... [hush][hide comment]
I don't know FullMoon. I'll leave it to you to focus on terrrrrism as the only issue facing America.
Yeah, OK.Nice diversion You implied taking the train would eliminate the security hassle. You are wrong.
Yeah, OK.Nice diversion You implied taking the train would eliminate the security hassle. You are wrong.
I am not wrong. Airport security is much longer everywhere than train security - and a number of advanced economies have trains. Of course, if you traveled or had any means/interest in looking around the world, instead of just living inside your own paranoid head and political bubble, you would know this.
"If they do we should immediately build a wall to keep all the illegals IN!"
Build the wall along the west side of Interstate 5 from Canada to Mexico. Everything to the left can be Ecotopia and to the right, New Washington, New Oregon, New California. So long and Merry Christmas, Ecotopers!
Original mike,
OK how do you do that?
I am a us born citizen. Say I choose to live in ca. That makes me a ca citizen too (14th amendment)
So the secession amendment takes away us citizenship for anyone living in ca on independence day.
Whay prevents me from becoming a citizen of nevada (establishing residence) prior to independence day?
Then i could either stay in nv or move back to ca.
Are you saying that I would lose my citizenship for moving to a foreign country?
No more expats? How long could i live in another country before losing my citizenship?
As i said, it is tricky.
Here in Puerto Rico, where independence either forced or chosen, is always a possibility we think about such things.
John Henry
Er, NAEP disassociated scores for White and Black students dont reflect immigrant populations, or do so only marginally.
And if one considers Asian and Hispanic scores CA underperforms badly compared to immigration destinations like Texas and Arizona.
And its not a meaningless metric. You see the truth behind the number in the classroom, in college admissions, in hiring, on the street in fact.
I don't know. I haven't put a lot of thought into this (you do know this is just a fun daydream, right?)
Maybe every US citizen on a given day must choose whether they are a US or CA citizen.
R&B,
We have been residents of SF and environs for over thirty years - my wife is a native. I think I see things clearly.
There are severe problems here. Most have been getting progressively worse in my time, very little has been improved by the accumulating wealth of the Bay Area bubble.
As for mass emigration from ca you would not need ajob, money or residence in another state. All you need is physical presence. People can get to another state by walkig if need be.
Once i get to Arizona, as a us citizen i have every right to stay.
I also have every right to ask Arizona to feed and shelter me as well as provide schools for my kids.
An independent ca would mean massive refugee camps in az, nv, oregon and maybe other states as well.
California refugees might well be distributed to some of the more enlightened cities like Madison
John Henry
Blogger Rhythm and Balls said...
Yeah, OK.Nice diversion You implied taking the train would eliminate the security hassle. You are wrong.
I am not wrong. Airport security is much longer everywhere than train security - and a number of advanced economies have trains. Of course, if you traveled or had any means/interest in looking around the world, instead of just living inside your own paranoid head and political bubble, you would know this.
Another brilliancy. The idea of the bullet train is to take passengers from the airline. If the train accomplished that, it would be a more attractive and much easier target for terrorists. And the subject is not terrorism, the subject is the inconvenience and wasted time going through security because of prior terrorists attacks. You brought the subject up.
Fun daydream about ca, mike.
A daily issue for discussion here in Puerto Rico
John Henry
California: Go to hell Trumpsters! We are leaving you!
President Trump: Good luck! I'll be sending over a team tomorrow to begin renegotiation of water rights, since you are no longer part of this country.
California: Oh. But...
I'm not objecting to present CA residents from choosing US citizenship and moving here.
Yep, No chance of a terrorist attack on a 200 mph train with a thousand passengers.How simple to derail that? Followed by same security precautions and delays as airports.
Well. Not really since it won't really go anywhere that anybody wants to go unless your a cabbage farmer or a biker with a DUI.
California already has a nice coastal railroad.
Why not expand the right of way and build it there? I suspect insufficient opportunity for graft.
Actually, let me amend that. I am not objecting to US citizens living in CA declaring they want to remain US citizens and moving here.
CA doesn't have uniform politics, though. If it tried to secede, it would break apart.
Absolutly and not soon enough. We have been trying to divorce ourselves from the loonie California for decades.
STATE OF JEFFERSON
CA keeps the illegals.
Balls: blah blah blah Just a preview of what's to come.
Ah nice. You pout like a little bitch. Is this what we have to look forward to for the next 4 years? Watching your tantrums as you roll around on the carpet, holding your breath till you turn blue.
That will be entertaining. Thanks again Trump. You have a gift for encouraging for making the Left disgrace themselves.
Me, fighting with a liberal on the Althouse blog! It's like we're getting the band back together!
"It's nice that the oh-so-well-educated commenters here can't figure out that the only gripe they have with California - educational "scores" - (and talk about a meaningless metric) - are pretty much 100% predicated on its massive immigrant laborer population.
Keep up the "brain-"storming, guys!"
So the "massive immigrant laborer population" is magically somehow not part of the State of California?
Greenland would be a fabulous place to live if it weren't for the cold.
No R & B - Ca has geographical spoils, the welfare state progs have ruined it.
Blogger Original Mike said...
I'm not objecting to present CA residents from choosing US citizenship and moving here.
So they could move here a day before the independence cutoff and move back the day after and keeping their US citizenship as an expat?
Sorry Mike, I would need some more detailed explanation of how to remove US citizenship from citizens of an independent state/country of California.
Any thoughts?
Anyone?
John Henry
Since they really really want Hillary Clinton, enough to secede from the Union for her sake, we could insist that she be the President of California. That would disqualify her from running for POTUS in 2020, as if any more disqualification were needed, so it's win-win.
R&B,
Airport security is much longer everywhere than train security
I fly a lot and to a lot of different airports big and small. Occasionally I spend 30-45 minutes in line but that is rare. A long line is generally 15-20 minutes to get through. (5 minutes since I got PreChek earlier this year)
So I save, worst case, 30 minutes on checkin by train. How much longer does a train take? Even the fastest bullet train in Japan only runs about 140mph average.
Vs a plane that files 600mph?
Seems like the 30 minute checkin hassle is way more than offset by the hours longer that I need to spend sitting on a train.
from a time standpoint, that seems like a stupid argument.
I do agree that most airport checkin security is mainly theatre and pointless.
I guess if your time is valueless, a train makes sense. My time has a lot of value both to me personally (I can be doing other, more interesting stuff) and professionally (people pay me for my time)
When trains get quicker than planes, as they already are in a very few destination pairs, I'll ride them. If stagecoaches are quicker, I'll take them.
I would also point out how little passenger air travel is subsidized compared to train travel. Air is tens of dollars per trip subsidy. rail is hundreds of dollars per trip.
John Henry
"So they could move here a day before the independence cutoff and move back the day after and keeping their US citizenship as an expat?"
I'm not sure where "here" is.
"I would need some more detailed explanation of how to remove US citizenship from citizens of an independent state/country of California."
The provisions would be in the Constitutional Amendment granting CA the right to secede.
A long line is 15-20 minutes, a more typical line is 5-15 minutes.
With Pre-Chek, more like 5. Pre-Chek costs $110 for 10 years ($11/year). Well worth the money even for the infrequent flier.
John Henry
"Here" = Any of the US states or territories.
Any ideas on what those provisions might look like? I am assuming that of course they would be in the amendment. It would be nice to be able to know what is in the Amendment before passing it. Though perhaps un-Californian. ("We need to pass this bill to see what's in it." N. Pelosi)
John Henry
"Well worth the money even for the infrequent flier."
It's tempting. For some reason when I re-entered the US from AU in Dallas last month I was put in the Pre-Check "line" (I was the only one in the line) to go through security for my connecting flight from Dallas to Madison. It was great. I started taking my fluids out of my bag and the attendents said "What are you doing? Put that back in there".
Where anyone resides on CA Independence Day is immaterial. On that day any US citizen anywhere can renounce their US citizenship and declare themself a citizen of CA citizen.
On that day any US citizen anywhere can renounce their US citizenship and declare themself a citizen of CA citizen.
But wouldn't they need a passport, at least, and a visa? We wouldn't have to give them permanent residency.
Will US citizens in the California Confederacy be illegal aliens with all of the rights and none of the responsibilities that illegals in California currently enjoy?
"We wouldn't have to give them permanent residency."
No, we wouldn't.
"Will US citizens in the California Confederacy be illegal aliens with all of the rights and none of the responsibilities that illegals in California currently enjoy?"
That's up to CA.
This merely kicking and screaming by the juveniles in CA. Which is nearly the entire state. Just give them a timeout and make them stand in the corner and face a power plant.
It's funny how the whole idea of "breaking up California" into 4-6 different states was ridiculed out of hand by the Left, but the idea of "CalExit" is suddenly realistic in the wake of Trump's victory.
Busting up the state makes more sense than CalExit'ing, and is more in line with "a nation of States". This was the last proposal that was attempted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Californias
Didn't get enough votes to qualify for the ballot.
I'd definitely vote for this, but I'm not sure *how* it could happen at a Federal level.
Said richardsson: Finally, Quebec would have to assume complete responsibility for its military defense.
Oh, California wouldn't worry about that little detail. Peace 'n love, y'know!
I'm thinking the US keeps any military installations on the coast, a la Guantanamo.
Don't let California secede -- expel them.
And then establish a $1/kWh charge on exports of electricity to the California Republic.
" But our side will now cultivate a grassroots that will crank them out like Pez dispensers."
Good luck with that. What percentage of the vote did the Green Party get? How many state houses and governorships do the Dems hold? If Tim Ryan had been chosen as minority leader, it would have been a sign that the Democrats were serious about appealing to the blue collars they've screwed over in the past. Picking Granny Pelosi, who is perfectly happy to keep on playing the same old game, shows me the Dem strategy is to double down on stupid.
I see you still think that hurling abuse at people constitutes some sort of viable argument. Keep on thinking that way. It's gotten the GOP control of Congress and the WH. People are sick and tired of being bullied and shamed by the obnoxious overgrown retarded babies on the left. They won't change their mind if you scream louder and dream up more creative insults.
Who is doing the vote counting since the election? Is it the news media? Then I don't fucking believe it. When the professional staff quit on the Wednesday following the election, Trump was ahead in the popular vote by something like 0.7%. We should have seen the lead change hands as the military absentee ballot were counted (87% for Trump), but it has been a steady climb for Hillary. Bullshit.
Michael K,
The hateful obscene stuff that he/she/it spews is coming from some significant pathology.
Isn't the politically correct pronoun She/he/it?
Pronounced "Shit"
Here is a pronunciation guide if needed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEu1dFLwf3E
As in "Shit claims not to be angry at the world. Shit claims to be aware at the world"
Aware at the world? WTF does that even mean?
John Henry
Personally I think R&B has either drug or psychological problems. Apparently he/she can't make it through the day without insulting all and sundry. Makes you almost lonesome for that gentle goof Garage!
You know, sometimes comments just disappear. There's a 90 minute gap, from 1:30 to 3:00, where the comments are gone.
To be more precise, 1:34 to 3:04.
Isn't the politically correct pronoun She/he/it?
Pronounced "Shit"
Good one, John Henry! Maybe it should be pronounced 'Sheeee-it!' [the 'h' is silent].
Every once in a while some talk about Texas or California exiting the United States comes up and people discuss it like it could actually happen. Haven't these people heard of the Civil War?
Rick, in that case the North did not want the South to leave. In this case, I don't see any problem getting 38 states to say, "Don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out."
I wonder how a Trump Administration would keep California from doing whatever the hell it wants within its borders, as it already does. They are free to be as hopey changey as they want. What practical impediment does Trump offer that can only be remedied by secession ?
Hmmm, more comments just disappeared. It looks like a certain person has been added to the "small handful of commenters" list, so we really should stop talking to or about him unless and until he gets unbanned.
Hmmm, more comments just disappeared. It looks like a certain person has been added to the "small handful of commenters" list, so we really should stop talking to or about him unless and until he gets unbanned.
Well, clearly someone here thinks that some commenters deserve "personal attacks" and some do not.
I think someone's personal attacks on this thread were approximately four times nastier than everyone else's attacks and counterattacks put together, and he's too self-centered to notice the discrepancy. Quite a few of his earlier comments have been left up, and these contain such stuff as "devoted to bullshit", references to wetnurses and beating of scrawny chests, "asshole", "out-of-touch asshole", "ninny opinion", "anonymous internet jerk-off", and loads of gross misrepresentations of what others think, just in the first four comments. Looks to me like Meade left enough evidence to show he had sound reasons for removing further comments. I do believe that people who behave like that deserve not attacks but counterattacks.
That article was pretty silly. Apparently, it's "almost impossible" for a state to secede. Ridiculous. Any state that wanted to secede could do so, basically by voting themselves that they want to do it and informing the rest of us. This isn't Civil War times, and the rest of the country wouldn't be willing to send the Army to make sure that the South frees its slaves. Just wouldn't happen.
I remember seeing this discussion about Brexit. England can invoke Article 50. Or - some said - it could just vote to withdraw from the treaty that it ratified to join. That would work.
If California voted to leave, I for one would speak loudly about their right to do so. Of course, I would also speak loudly about the right of any part of California to secede from California and stay with us. I'm thinking Central California, with all the poverty and all the water. Would be interesting.
Cooler heads might want to do a serious cost/benefit analysis of California secession.
Trump won't be President forever, if that's what this is about, but secession would be.
Hillary would make a fine Governor/President of California (state or "republic")
Nobody has mentioned an army yet. California would need one, wouldn't they? Aren't the State legislators always crowing about how we're the 6th biggest economy in the world? Seems to me that we'd be a ripe target for nations like, I dunno, Russia or Mexico.
How do you raise an army in a state that's been so committed to getting rid of guns, I wonder.
I think someone's personal attacks on this thread were approximately four times nastier...
Is there a measuring device for "nastier?" That sounds a bit subjective.
I also find the irony that, in the age of Trump, a serial insulter - someone who, you could effectively argue, gained nominations and election wins based on the shock of insult value alone - decency has suddenly become some sort of premium.
I think that just goes to show you how much phony civility - (as someone says, "civility bullshit") has taken over. Another term for this is "political correctness" - which is obviously nothing more than civility applied to groups, or to identity politics. Often there are crucial truths that go long neglected when a culture of Victorian etiquette takes over any prioritization of truth telling.
This got so bad that Trump didn't even have to tell the truth. He told a couple crucial truths, and 75% of the rest of it were constant lies. Lies so reflexively told that people gave up on fact-checking them. And yet, it was enough to win. He couldn't have gotten the attention he did for telling a neglected truth every now and then had he not mixed it up with truths (and just shocking insults) about his opponents' character. All 17 of those opponents. (My personal favorite was when he denied attacking Rand Paul or his looks, and then added, "and there's plenty of subject matter right there").
Remember that the next time you talk about the strength in numbers of righteous accusers.
I admit that I don't mind mixing personal failings with an interlocutor's argumentative failings. It makes it easier. As it was called, the Nietzschean exception to the ad hominem fallacy. When someone's arguments are so consistently wrong in so consistent a manner, you have to wonder what's wrong with them characterologically - what vices they prefer or values they lack - to skew their thinking in so persistent a manner.
I was accused on this thread - apparently still am - of apparently being insufficiently complacent. Why can't I rejoice in a serial liar's razor-thin technical win? Why can't I find the his phony populism or crony capitalism lacking - especially now that even Sarah Palin called him out on the Carrier deal? Sarah Palin gets to criticize him already but I don't? Something doesn't sound right about that. And then we get to these cabinet picks - Exxon Mobil CEO as secretary of state. I guess you'd have to be pretty complacent to be ok with a foreign diplomacy policy that prioritizes oil over all else - especially as we put the planet through its sixth great extinction.
So insufficiently complacent? I accept the charge. I just don't think complacency is a virtue. We will have to disagree on that.
And you can insult me about it. All of you can.
Just don't complain to the parents here when I attack back twice as effectively (i.e. nastily) as the great number of Forever Trumpers here who attack me for it.
That would seem fair. But I guess there aren't many role models for fairness either leading the GOP or their cultural institutions. They seem in fact to think fairness is over-rated.
And that's another vice.
Chill, dude.
Lol. Right. Insufficiently complacent.
I happen to like ideas. As I said, insult me about it. All of you do.
Tell me I have a medical/psychological problem. Insufficient pro-Trumpism. Or as the other guy might have accused me of, Insufficient TSA Grope Appreciation and Love for Security Line Wait-times. Non-Lobbying-Oriented Boosting of Substitute Industries.
Medicalize the complaint. Tell me I'm wrong for not supporting Hitler now that Stalin was overthrown.
There will be plenty of time to chill. Manhattan-sized glaciers are floating down the North Atlantic.
Political dissent as a psychological problem. How can I not see the good in this?
California has just barely enough self awareness to realize that no one else cares if they leave.
I remember when there was a movement, semi-serious, to annex Baja California which has only a narrow connection to the rest of Mexico. Lots of Californians vacationed there.
Now might be the time to suggest Mexico annex California. After all, a third of Los Angles population is probably Mexican citizens.
"Is there a measuring device for 'nastier?'" Not a precision device, but it's easy to make a rough estimate. Who was the first on this thread to call someone else here an "asshole"? R&B, 10:18am. First to use any form of "shit" ("bullshit")? R&B, 9:48am. First to use "fuck"? Anglelyne (9:13am), but not referring to anyone present here, and R&B soon joined in. First, and I think, only one to accuse an interlocutor of having a small penis? R&B, 10:18am. I could go on, or I could just refer to my 5:48pm comment, and R&B could try to find examples on the other side, but in fact anyone who looks at this thread can see where the bulk of the nastiness is coming from. It's perfectly obvious to anyone not blinded by self-love and contempt for his opponents that R&B has in fact been far more abusive than anyone else here, and probably more abusive than all the rest of us put together.
He has also used some demonstrably false arguments. A 74-vote margin in the Electoral College is not huge, by historical standards, but it's certainly not "razor-thin" either, and it's the only kind of victory that counts, so it's not "technical" - quite the opposite. Nor has anyone here suggested "complacency" - we'd just like some honest arguments, and seldom get them from R&B. Oh well, another day, another pile of silly crap cluttering up the Althouse comments.
I liked the Grey Poupon reference.
If my brain were to pronounce it "pop on" instead of "poop on" I would not have liked it so much.
That is the German in me, literally.
Was Hillary trying to get the most votes in the EC or was she trying to win the popular vote?
It seems to me that depending which way you answer this question Hillary is either a sore loser or an idiot. What a shitty president she would have been.
So one person has appointed himself the measuring device on applying personal political correctness (i.e. nastiness/civility) to comments threads. Good to know!
And... he does it based on profanity alone or based on who did it first. Hey! I respect my president-elect enough to take cues on American social etiquette from him! That's what he did. Are you criticizing me or criticizing our wonderful commander in chief-to-be? Don't you want America to win, now? This is the new normal. I for one, welcome our new overlord and his brusque ways!
The suspected EC win (not confirmed until electors cast votes - not certain) but huge popular vote loss is not a technical win? I guess you're saying it's a technical loss, then.
But all this is irrelevant. I addressed what had been addressed about the substantive arguments (you haven't brought one - this is just piddly political trifle) - i.e. policies that concern California - and you're just attempting to draw me into an over-personalized drama. AFTER the blog proprietor has acted on it. Are you speaking for him? I think he can make his own decisions without you. Oh no! Hopefully that wasn't an attack.
But anyway, in a biased forum I'm not going to revisit decisions that aren't yours in order to further a drama that has nothing to do with the substantive disagreement (policies that California disagrees with) that became the basis for the argument. When you're ready to address that, let me know. Until then, I get it: I'm a bad, evil, horrible despicable person who argues soooo unfairly. I can trot out a violin to help play along to that song, too - if you want. But you'll have to sing it without me. Defending oneself is not allowed and I'm too busy and interested in substance to help out with drama class.
Sorry Meade, for responding to Dr Weevil's obsessively personalized focus on me. I realize that defending myself makes it look like I'm attacking others. But I prefer to stick to substance. Dr Weevil may appear instead to want to stick to me - the only point where this blog advantages him.
"California has just barely enough self awareness to realize that no one else cares if they leave."
Oh, we'd care all right.
Thanks Guild. I liked it too.
But the rest of my language was too, er, colorful - I'm told.
I should have restricted my color in that comment to the mustard yellow of the condiment in question. The other coloration was apparently distracting and mean. (Dr Weevil has written a succinct dissertation on this).
Many apologies.
R&B, do you ever get asked to play Santa Claus at kiddie Christmas Parties?
"California has just barely enough self awareness to realize that no one else cares if they leave."
Oh, we'd care all right.
We'd heartily encourage it! :-)
Lincoln believed that the insolubility of the Union was implicit in the constitution. If states could secede, they would secede when it was convenient and possibly rejoin the union when it was convenient. That is, Texas could do something like leave the union, conquer Cuba, and then rejoin the union as Texas + Cuba.
No Lewis. Kids have enough fantasies to indulge (and make up on their own) without getting them to believe in more things that will traumatize them and raise their distrust of adults once they find out the truth. People can be nice and do nice things for kids without dressing up and looking like a weird magical old figure who provides a lap to sit in and a story about how their presents arrived.
My personal favorites (to suggest) are: Trips to the zoo, the library, the science museum, a hike outdoors, whale watching (expensive but worth it), field trips, nature centers, etc. And if you want to buy them a gift, just do it. No dress-up needed.
Incidentally I just saw five young guys and a girl dressed up as Santa Clauses outside of a bar. One presumes that their intended activities for the night had little to do with kids. Or at least, that would be my hope. ;-)
R&B thinks I have an "obsessively personalized focus" on him? A textbook case of 'projectile commenting' - accusing others of what he does so much more of himself. He's the one who has accused others on this very thread of having "a puny pee-pee" and having never recovered from having a wetnurse when young, among much else. That kind of thing is what makes him a "bad, evil, horrible despicable person", not just a damned liar. And he is of course a damned liar. "I guess you're saying . . ."? No, I said nothing of the sort. But why bother? He'll just come up with some more stupid lies and insults.
Not acting like a raving lunatic != being complacent about a Trump presidency. You need to change minds to get the results you are looking for. Insulting people who disagree with you isn't a very effective strategy to do that. If you don't believe me, just ask presidents Romney and Hillary Clinton.
I think we need to keep our state count at 50. Otherwise, we'd have to change all the flags. SO, we could get rid of CA and take on---British Columbia! Of course, we'd have some difficulty with Canada but having an unrestricted route to the state of Alaska would be nice. Nice not having to mess with kilometers, loonies, liters and leaving guns at home.
He'll just come up with some more stupid lies and insults.
I think my insults are pretty good, actually. No Triumph the Insult Comic Dog, here. But not bad.
As for my lies, they will never be any match for yours. Yours are MUCH better! ;-)
About done yet? I sure am.
It's been nice. I'm ready for dessert. And maybe a moonlit walk along the beach.
I think that, at the onset of the Civil War, there were only 23 states in the 'Union' and 11 in the CSA. So things can and do change.
Not acting like a raving lunatic != being complacent about a Trump presidency.
Hmmm. You might need to convince me that those who aren't raving against Trump aren't complacent lunatics.
Come on. I haven't heard so much as a peep from his fans here. Again, why do I have to rely on Sarah Palin to come up with a criticism of him so basic and so conservative that even an Althouse commenter might have come up with it? He is picking and choosing winners and losers in the marketplace - through bribes!
You need to change minds to get the results you are looking for. Insulting people who disagree with you isn't a very effective strategy to do that.
Not really. Trump won by insulting people. And you haven't changed my mind. Maybe you need to insult me more.
Here. Try this.
If you don't believe me, just ask presidents Romney and Hillary Clinton.
Exactly. Where are their sick burns?
Of course R&B is done. He hasn't actually managed to point to a single lie on my part, whereas I've showed him several of his. Wait, I get it! Mine are "MUCH better!" because even a clever lad like R&B can't even name them, much less refute them. They escape criticism by being indistinguishable from the simple truth.
Blogger mockturtle said...
I think we need to keep our state count at 50. Otherwise, we'd have to change all the flags. SO, we could get rid of CA and take on---British Columbia!
No. Cuba.
Think about it. BC already might as well be part of the Union. Cuba, as the 50th to replace cali-for-ni-a, would be a ringing endorsement of colonialism. Cuba is more than four times as big as Hawaii, and you can get there in a frikkin' zodiac.
The people in BC will fall all over themselves to buy condos in American Cuba.
Here's another.
My hero. A total inspiration.
Of course R&B...
B-O-R-I-N-G.
Talk about yourself. I know I'm the most interesting thing you can find on this thread. But please.
All this attention is a little unseemly.
No elf is as interesting as Santa Claus, R&B.
What's really unseemly - and interesting, in a train-wreck sort of way - is seeing someone refuse to back up his accusation that I've told lies here, while pretending that I'm the one acting like an asshole. And the same guy gets all annoyed when someone suggests that he may not be entirely sane. Fascinating.
Lewis, I agree Cuba would be a good addition and the timing is right. And, hell, we already have Gitmo. So...California is out, Cuba is in. Nice!
An added bonus with Cuba is easier access to baseball players.
Balls: Just don't complain to the parents here when I attack back twice as effectively (i.e. nastily) as the great number of Forever Trumpers here who attack me for it.
This is so rich. You are not attacked because of your opinions, you are attacked because over the last several years you have established a pattern of trolling, insulting and acting in bad faith. You are like a con expressing outrage that everyone checks their wallet before they shake hands with you.
BTW, when are you going to start "attacking back twice as effectively" ? You've been sliming my people as racist sexist homophobes for years. That's why you got Trump. So your solution is to double down? Khan, I am laughing at the "superior" intellect. Ha.
And "forever Trumpers" ? Dude, you are so out of touch with reality. We don't care about your attacks on Trump for two reasons:
1) We held our nose to vote for him because Hillary Clinton is above the law. He is not our first second or even third choice. So good luck trying to "shame" us over our support for him
2) We know that you don't really believe in the things you lecture the rest of us about. You are Bill Clinton complaining the Chelsea was sexually harassed at work. You are Tony Soprano whining about getting robbed. You are Dan Rather complaining about fake news. In short, you have zero credibility and your "arguments" are easily dismissed. Gosh golly gee, who would have thought there would be a consequence for all your distortions and lies over the last several years? Imagine that...
As for CA, we know that if Texas determined the winner of the popular vote, you would be in here arguing for the sanctity of the electoral college. You are transparent, you have no principles and no shame.
But I hope you stay to provide us even more entertainment. Conan was spot on about the lamentations of "women" like you. Please keep it up. I'm already in talks to bottle your tears of desperation. $5 an ounce so far!
Dr. Weevil pulls off the impossible: Making drama without the entertainment value. Passionate tedium. Cool.
At least he gets to discuss me, this way. Well, everyone has to find their own way to make life feel meaningful and worthwhile.
At the North Pole . . .
"Ah, I see that our . . . guest .. has regained consciousness."
"Lemme out of this cage, Klaus! I am going to expose you and your elf slave pens for all the world to see!"
"Speaking of elves, I think that our guest would make a fine elf. What do you think, Dennis?"
"E's a bit on the tall side, sir."
"He is, isn't he. Well, then, we will have to make him shorter . . ."
Balls: I also find the irony that, in the age of Trump, a serial insulter - someone who, you could effectively argue, gained nominations and election wins based on the shock of insult value alone - decency has suddenly become some sort of premium.
"When politeness and orderliness are met with contempt and betrayal, do not be surprised if the response is something less polite, less orderly" - Glenn Reynolds
The only irony is that you are shocked and outraged your own tactics are being used against you. Again, Tony Soprano whining that he got roughed up.
Speak for yourself, Fen. I have been a Trump supporter since early in the campaign. I didn't hold my nose at all but cheerfully voted for him.
And there goes another commenter obsessed with me - while explaining that he is incapable of criticizing Trump based on the fact of who he ran against.
Yep, even Sarah Palin's a bigger man than that commenter. Somehow she doesn't say, "Poor me! I can't criticize Trump. He ran against Clinton, after all!"
Sounds like people who make Hitler a hero - because Stalin.
Other than that, it's a long exercise in sloppy seconds. But the personal attacks are typical. Too bad he couldn't get them in before the owner felt threatened by them. Otherwise he too would have gotten a comeuppance worse than the one he got a week ago on the Private Benjamin thread.
Other than that, it sure is good to get lectured by someone who's never risen in the ranks and believes America's most important interests are restoring Jeffersonian democracy to Mogadishu. Yep, I think he doesn't know why Trump won, either. Those steelworkers in the upper Midwest were really fed up with PC. It had nothing to do with jobs or trade! Why, if it did, they might have voted for a conventional Republican!
Hilarious. Meade, the lies some of your commenters tell themselves seems to border on self-parody. Which is a way of attacking oneself. Is that allowed on the blog? The way Fen personally attacked his own capacity for rational, independent thought?
Oh well. The one thing this blog needs is a neocon.
Surf: I always thought the Articles of Confederation superior to the United States Constitution.
I once did too. But then there is the realization that a loose confederacy would not have been able to sufficiently contribute to winning WW2 or the Cold War. And that alternate history likely would have resulted in the Nazi or the Commies taking over the Americas.
I don't even know what Fen is saying. Or what is upsetting him. Or what he's laughing at. He seems to be taking seriously and demanding the honest truth from things he doesn't understand.
At the risk of a "personal attack," It's rather like watching a security guard angrily yelling at a series of complex math equations on a chalk board, and exhorting, "No one believes you any more! You have no integrity! You're full of lies - like that time you made my clock skip an hour! Where are your principles! You have no shame! I drink your tears!"
Meade - half of those "attacks" were direct quotes of his.
Balls: The suspected EC win (not confirmed until electors cast votes - not certain) but huge popular vote loss is not a technical win?
Find a mirror. Now say:
"Dallas had more total yards, so Green Bay should consider their 306-232 victory only a technical win"
This is how stupid you look.
Telling the truth as best one can, and expecting others to tell the truth, is sooooo tedious! Poor R&B just can't stand it when people ask him to behave like a grownup, or go away and sit at the kiddie table so the grownups can discuss politics. It's sooooo unfair! Is R&B a transgendered transgenerational who identifies as a 12-year-old girl? He can't seem to comprehend that we'd all much rather not discuss his personal failings, which would be really easy if he would just go away, or act like an adult.
By the way, non-establishment conservatives are not in fact all that happy with the Carrier deal or some of Trump's cabinet choices, though they are thrilled with most of the latter. Anyone who bothers to visit the major non-establishment, non-social-con libertarianish conservative blogs (e.g. InstaPundit, Ace of Spades, Just One Minute, Patterico, ChicaoBoyz) would know that. But that would make complaints about kneejerk Trump-worshippers look silly, so he's very careful not do that. I believe Thomas Aquinas would call that "crass ignorance" - intentionally avoiding knowledge that would restrain one from doing what one wants to do.
I believe it was Gen. William Sherman who said: "We fought a damn war to get California and we'll probably have to fight another damn war to get rid of it."
This is how stupid you look.
I think there's a way I could "look" stupider.
Remember how you said underwater volcanoes were leading to an increase of sea ice?
What was the name of the last college course you passed?
I'm glad I've got you here to worry about looks. Do you spend a lot of time on your hair, also?
By the way, non-establishment conservatives are not in fact all that happy with the Carrier deal or some of Trump's cabinet choices...
Right. Me too. But instead of discussing that with me you obsess on all the things you don't like about me.
I think I'm now starting to understand why Republicans can't get anything done. Can you imagine a meeting between them? All vendettas and backstabbing and complaints about who wasn't nice to whom and drama about who the most honestest of them happens to be and blah blah blah. This is where our tax dollars go, folks.
Michael K said..."The leftist enclaves are actually rather small although I was shocked to see Orange County go for Hillary this time."
I guess I am not that surprised about Orange County, as having driven much of the area around Anaheim and surrounding towns a number of years ago, and seeing the difference from when I was a teenager in the 60's. There are more people there than in the coastal enclaves going south.
Anyway, I'm glad you are getting out.
For all but one of those still reading - it will be lost on the one:
The U.S. is not the only country in which leaders are sometimes elected while losing the popular vote. It's actually quite common. In the U.K., for instance, voters vote for the party, not the Prime Minister, but (as someone pointed during the Bush-Gore recounts) there have been quite a few P.M.s who were elected when their party got more seats, but fewer (sometimes a lot fewer) total votes than the opposition. It can very easily happen that one party wins a lot of seats 51-49 or 55-45 while losing others 70-30 or 80-20. Somehow the British don't seem to mind when that happens, because that's how the system works. For such mismatches to be possible, all you need is a parliamentary democracy with 'first-past-the-post' constituencies. (The alternative is Israeli-style proportional representation, where parties are assigned seats in proportion to their shares of the national vote. In that case the winning party, or coalition, does have to have a majority of the popular vote to have a majority of the seats.)
"Instead of discussing that with me . . ." How were we supposed to do that? Anyone who goes to the top of the page and does a ctrl-f on R&B's name will find that his first seven comments contained nothing but insults. (Maybe more. I stopped counting. Too boring.)
As usual, his complaints are the precise opposite of the truth. We try to argue, he brings the insults, and then he complains that we aren't arguing with him, and if we try again to do so, he refuses to present counterarguments, but continues with the insults. Is he just trying to get us to write "Fuck you, asshole" so he can say "Look! I'm not the only one who throws crude insults here!" Sure looks like it. Sorry, not going to do it.
Did you want a tissue?
Look at who can't stop fighting.
I don't know what Weevil will say next. But I guarantee you this:
It will be about me.
Some people can't help themselves.
"I think I'm now starting to understand why Republicans can't get anything done."
This is a rather premature call. Let's see what gets done within, say, 6 months of Trump's Inauguration with a GOP Congress.
I predict they'll get quite a bit done and you'll hate most of it.
Says the guy who can't stop commenting about me, and can't even begin to argue like an honest man. You called me a liar, liar: care to give some examples of my alleged lies? I've given examples of yours, and you haven't bothered to try to defend them.
Hmmmm. There was a guy in college who liked to get drunk and go up to much bigger guys at parties and tell them their girlfriends were ugly. If he hadn't been killed in a drunk-driving accident a few years later, I would wonder if her were still around and calling himself Rhythm&Balls. Of course, he actually risked physical harm with his stupid insults, so R&B is like a totally gutless version of drunk guy.
By the way, my 10:41pm comment was not in fact about R&B, which makes his 10:55pm yet another stupid lie.
DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!
Trolling makes all the world's go round and round.
""Round And Round"
Out on the streets, that's where we'll meet
You make the night, I always cross the line
Tightened our belts, abuse ourselves
Get in our way, we'll put you on your shelf
Another day, some other way
We're gonna go, but then we'll see you again
I've had enough, we've had enough
Cold in vain, she said
[Pre-chorus:]
I knew right from the beginning
That you would end up winnin'
I knew right from the start
You'd put an arrow through my heart
[Chorus:]
Round and round
With love we'll find a way just give it time
Round and round
What comes around goes around
I'll tell you why
Lookin' at you, lookin' at me
The way you move, you know it's easy to see
The neon light's on me tonight
I've got a way, we're gonna prove it tonight
Like Romeo to Juliet
Time and time, I'm gonna make you mine
I've had enough, we've had enough
It's all the same, she said
[Pre-chorus]
[Chorus]
Yeah!
Out on the streets, that's where we'll meet
You make the night, I always cross the line
Tightened our belts, abuse ourselves
Get in our way, we'll put you on your shelf
[Chorus]
Round and round
With love we'll find a way just give it time, time, time, time
Round and round
What comes around goes around
I'll tell you why, why, why, why
Round and round"
I predict they'll get quite a bit done and you'll hate most of it.
Then they would be doing the opposite of the things that got him elected - and it will backfire.
As I said, a phony populist. A phony progressive.
And that will backfire. It's not what got him PA-WI-OH-MI. Nothing conservative in any of those results for the basis of why they voted how they voted.
Hmmmm. There was a guy in college who liked to get drunk and go up to much bigger guys at parties and tell them their girlfriends were ugly. If he hadn't been killed in a drunk-driving accident a few years later, I would wonder if her were still around and calling himself Rhythm&Balls. Of course, he actually risked physical harm with his stupid insults, so R&B is like a totally gutless version of drunk guy.
From these words, one can conclude that the author:
1. Thinks might makes right
2. Harbors violent vengeance fantasies
3. Still can't stop thinking about me
Other than that, what did you think about the author's ability to "be responsive to the post," Meade? Myself, I wasn't much impressed with it in that regard.
But I'm sure the author believes it was awesome. Totally awesome.
He must get awfully lonely on the days I'm not here or don't bother to comment. Poor guy.
Here.
It helps me.
You don't have to give up these wonderful comments because of disruptive elements.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/blog-comment-killfile/kpoilnkelonbaapoapibddjaojohnpjf
You can always turn it off and return to receiving the usual shit-splattering.
"Try making Nebraska a sovereign nation. That'd be a hoot!"
Ah might be movin' to Nebraska soon...
Gonna be a mental toss flycoon.
"The rest of your stupid, divided party rode off of his coattails. "
This was in response to the Trump mandate" was in large part referencing the state legislatures, governorship, etc that are in republican vs Democrat control. Not to mention the House and Senate.
The down ticket gains by Republicans began WAY before Trump. The coattails remark is silly.
Dr Weevil said...
He gets off on it.Don't play his game. let him continue believing he's the smartest guy in the room.
My children now reside in California. Orange county is one giant strip mall with a beach. A few years ago we could visit Big Sur and Joshua Tree and the were pretty well maintained. Now you have to wade through trash to get to a trailhead and then pick up the trash on the trail.
A great state but it has an overabundance of assholes.
Stay/leave it don't give a shit.
As Phil. 3:14 says: DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!
Trump won @ 3000 out of 3100 US Counties. It was a territorial and electoral LANDSLIDE.
And if you take out voter fraud and illegals voting Trump wins by a comfortable margin.
Maybe "poo pond" minus the final d would be the best.
Or even "poo PONd" without the d again ending.
Whenever I hear states that want to succeed over this or that president, I am reminded of 6 year old who grab their favorite blanket and make a big show of running away and then only to camp out in the treehouse out back till their parents apologize.
The Blue/Calexit crowd are massive hypocrites. They complain about how their 55 electoral college votes are inequitable while, using their own words, disenfranchising 39% of their own populace.
The entire notion of a Washington/Oregon/California country blithely ignores that the vast majority of the non-coastal parts of those states--meaning the rural parts--want nothing to do with such an idea.
The US Constitution came up with a system whereby states could be fairly autonomous. The very blue/calexit crowd that worked to destroy that autonomy now wants it back. Their solution is not to dismantle their national efforts, but to leave. Yet, state counties never had anything like the states even still enjoy, yet those demanding fairness grant none of their fairness to these counties.
That said, I would love to see a vote on "Yes California". I believe it would lose badly. More importantly, it would highlight just how out-of-touch most the coastal counties are to the rest of the state.
(If you look at just presidential results in Washington and Oregon, the urban/rural divide becomes really stark. It's more mixed in California, but if you instead look at the results of Prop 62, Repeal the Death Penalty, the divide is clearly shown. Unfortunately, the Secretary of State of California removed its awesome maps of the election results. In short, the counties where the Yes vote exceeded the No vote by 5% or more are: Alameda, Los Angeles, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Sonoma, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Yolo.)
Post a Comment