Comments by "No Fate But What We Make" (@SonoftheAllfather) on "California Three-State Split To Be Considered on November Ballots" video.

I've seen a lot of Republicans supporting this, and it shows how ignorant they are of CA geopolitics. This would create 3 blue states and 4 additional Dem Senate seats. North would be lorded over by a Leftist urban area (SF Bay) like so many other U.S. states (OR, WA, CO). The other two states would be Hispanic majority, one containing the LA region. The only state that would possibly be a swing state would be the state which contains Orange Co, but that area would be marginalized by the Hispanic masses and would be invaded and turned blue. This idea was put on the ballot by rich Silicon Valley elitists that want to increase Democratic power while simultaneously establishing a Northern state where tech companies can deregulate and evade the tax burden of the LA region. The only state split proposal that would be fair is the State of Jefferson initiative.
86
@Fuck You Google: Actually, you are wrong, and here's why. First, there is no "Central CA" in the Cal 3 proposal. There is CA, Northern CA, and Southern CA. The proposed state you're claiming would be red (Southern CA) would actually be majority Hispanic. It would include Orange Co, San Diego and Fresno, all of which are now swing at best and are leaning more blue because of the Hispanic invasion. Orange, SD and Fresno all went to Clinton in 2016. So did San Bernardino and Riverside.
16
Juli Kidman: You think someone can be called ignorant in general if they're simply uninformed about the geopolitical situation of another state?
15
@NowayJose They will continue to allow voter fraud so long as they make it possible for illegals to live in CA. I would support this initiative if the proposed state (simply called "California" in the Cal 3 proposal, which includes LA) also included the SF Bay Area and it extended across the current state all the way east to the Nevada border. Then you would have a marginally conservative state to the south that could control the border, SF and LA would be isolated but not cut off from water, and a solid red state in the north.
14
Article IV, Section III lays out the specific framework of the formation of new states. "New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress. "
11
Kacie Anderson No it won't. "Northern CA" will be dominated by the SF Bay, the most left-wing area in the state, if not the country. It will be solid blue. CA will be dominated by LA, which is majority Hispanic and extremely left-wing. It will be solid blue. Southern CA will contain some historically conservative areas that are now swinging blue because of mass immigration. If you look at election results from the propsed counties of Southern CA, all the counties with major population centers (San Diego, Fresno, Orange, San Bernardino) all went blue in 2016. Southern CA would be competitive, but will be blue. It will also continue getting blue as more and more young Hispanics become eligible to vote.
10
Kacie Anderson You really think Orange County conservatives voted for Feinstein because she's an incumbent? Lol CA conservatives hate Feinstein with a passion. They just didn't have a conservative candidate they united behind, so their votes were scattered amongst a number of different senatorial candidates. If you can't admit that Hispanics fundamentally alter the vote wherever they go, you're denying reality. That demographic is completely changing the entirety of Southern California and it will only get more and more blue as time goes along.
10
@Ariel Penry: No it wasn't. http://www.co.fresno.ca.us/departments/county-clerk-registrar-of-voters/election-information/election-results/results-of-june-7-2016-presidential-general-election
9
@chbrules: It would be a swing state essentially at its conception, and as is becomes more and more Hispanic, it will become a blue state. I would say that shift would likely occur within a decade and then it'll be a perpetual blue state.
9
@Elijah El: Why would the libtards be scared? This is good for them. This is a neoliberal globalist power grab.
8
This CA3 proposal is a globalist tech power grab. There is a new one of these proposals that pops up seemingly every year or so. The State of Jefferson Movement is the longest tenured and most feasible solution in that it benefits CA and US conservatives while not threatening Democratic hegemonic control over the rest of CA. It would not give Democrats any more Senate seats, but would give Republicans two more. There would be far fewer water issues with the SOJ, and far more potential for growth. The SOJ movement already has litigation in federal courts and has a solid plan of action. They hope to force a legislative solution out of a judicial settlement. I made a video about this topic, for anyone that is interested. https://youtu.be/XtP3ceoEolY
7
@Falkwulf: Federal laws don't prevent it. Constitutional law requires the state legislature approves it, as well as Congress.
7
@Alex: Yes, but the proposed states won't be competitive at all. Just look at the voting patterns in these areas.
7
Kacie Anderson It wasn't Never Trumpers, it was Hispanics who voted for Clinton. Hispanics don't vote as much in local elections, especially primaries. Cox only won by 2 points over Newsom in the primary in SD, which is also only 2 points more than the state average for Newsom. Orange gave Feinstein the majority of their vote for Senate and 25% of their vote to Newsom. Come actual election time, more Democrats will vote. San Bernardino and Fresno are ~50% Hispanic and that number is increasing as the conservative White population decreases. Orange and San Diego are ~33% Hispanic and growing. Southern CA will all be solid blue as this voting bloc ages and becomes more involved. Especially if amnesty is granted again.
7
Edward Saucedo Red cities? Points? Bro, no offense, but you are uninformed. Voting goes by county for president and district for Congress. Municipal opposition to the sanctuary state law is all good and well, but it doesn't amount to hegemonic control in that county or district. There are also 55 electoral college votes for CA, not 50, and CA is pretty much an automatic blue state at this point.
7
Al Fabeech Thanks Al. I agree, but I think the State of Jefferson initiative would actually work. I made a video about it if you're interested. I grew up in Northern CA and moved out of state, but I'm still close enough to be involved in the movement. The SOJ would create a solid red state and paradise destination for Southern Cal and inland conservatives, as well as out of state conservatives. That is why the secession is currently being blocked in federal court by an Obama appointed judge. Now this new globalist initiative with millions in tech dollars behind is basically bought and these battle-tired Rightists lap it up without any suspicion. All you have to do is follow the money to know what interests are being represented.
7
@Chicken Choker: It isn't up to the Supreme Court. Article IV, Section III: "New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress. "
6
eggsandwich8885 ChaosSwissroll pretty much said it all, but consider that if you are a Hispanic and a fiscal conservative, you are in the minority. Pew Research has suggested that around 80% of Hispanics in the U.S. want the government to be larger and more involved with their lives. Also consider that I shouldn't have to "reach out" to any Hispanics that are here illegally in this country. How can someone whose first action in this country was an illegal act be trusted? Those that are here legally should understand what this country was built upon republican government and liberty and that is why it is great. They should also realize why Latin America is fucked: because Latin American countries always regress back to socialism. Within a decade of Pinochet stepping down in Chile, there were Marxists in control again. The first thing they did was allow mass immigration because they figured all those immigrant votes would keep them in power. Disproportionate use of our social programs is also a problem. Many of our systems are now completely unsustainable because of mass Hispanic immigration. 68% of Medical recipients are Hispanic. Here's the bottom line. If you truly care about republicanism, small government and liberty, you will realize that Hispanic immigration is a threat to that. You should want to maintain a White majority, despite you not being White. The reason I promote a White majority is because even high average IQ immigrant groups like East Asians vote overwhelmingly for the Left. Basically, the vast majority of non-White groups vote overwhelmingly for the Left all around the Western world, and their kids tend to be even more likely to be left-wing. You have to understand that if this country becomes any more blue, there is a tipping point, after which it will essentially become a one-party state. That tipping point is Texas. If we lose Texas (which will happen as more young Hispanic immigrants become voters) it is over. The same thing is happening all over the West, which is the real reason there is so much anti-immigrant sentiment. Immigrants are destroying the ability of White/European people from being in control of our own destiny. They are the pawns of the Left, and it's frankly much more feasible to exclude them rather than hope that we can acculturate them before they vote for the destruction of our way of life.
6
Brian Donovan is correct. The only way this will ever happen is the way the SOJ is currently navigating the situation. They are looking to force a legislative solution from a judicial determination. Basically, they are going through the courts, and forcing them to recognize the under-representation of the northern counties.
5
Al Fabeech Ominous times coming. Ohio is still amazingly conservative. I wish you the best as well. We'll persevere. Our very way of life depends upon it.
5
@eggsandwich: "White superiority" in a historically White European nation based on Western values (values which Whites have been the stewards of since their conception). Yeah, what exactly is wrong with that again? If you think majority-White countries are free game for the entire world to invade, while the rest of the nations of the world (including Mexico) can control their demographics without accusations of racism, you are being a hypocrite and arguably anti-White. I suggest that if non-White immigrants have such a problem living in a country controlled by Whites with a White majority, perhaps they shouldn't move to a historically White nation controlled by Whites with a White-majority. I'm not going to Mexico trying to make it something different than it is and alter their ethnic, cultural and national identity. If I did I would be seen as an enemy and a racist, because that's exactly what I would be to the Mexican people. I also never said all immigrants like socialism. Stop trying to paint my argument as an absolute. Of course there are Hispanic conservatives. There are also Whites that vote for socialism, but the numbers don't lie. Hispanics vote about 60-70% for socialism, while Whites vote ~60% for republicanism. I agree with your assessment of Islam, but exactly why do you think that so many people falsely state that you can be racist to a Muslim? Simple: because Black and brown people are the overwhelming majority of Muslims. If you exclude Black and brown people from Europe, you are simultaneously significantly decreasing the amount of Muslims in your country. Think about it. That being said, socialism and big government are also ideologies that are supported with much greater fervor in ALL Western white-majority countries by non-White immigrants. I support excluding Islam. I support excluding socialism. Quite frankly, the easiest and most effective way of doing that is to restrict non-White immigration. That might be distasteful for you to the point of you rejecting it and being cognitively dissonant, but I refuse to ignore the connection.
5
@pretorious700: That is the other thing nobody understands: the water situation. The state containing LA would be the most populous and it would also be isolated from water sources. They would have to ration water and build hundreds of desalinization plants to be self-sustainable. LA is not only a cancerous festering Leftist sore of pollution and crime, it is literally built in the dumbest place ever. It also contains about 3 million foreign nationals that are there illegally and need to be removed.
3
@Kaeska Wood: I think that there should be a law that states if a city reaches a certain population size, it will become a district like DC. Then it could have its own legislative body and pass its own laws, but couldn't influence or effect state or federal law. It would also render that entire population area without senatorial representation, it would only have shadow congressmen that could lobby to influence politics, but don't have a vote. This would be a great way to marginalize illegal voting, combat urbanization, the urban bubble syndrome, lack of representation in rural areas, etc.
3
Katherine Barnes Coastal cities will vote yes. Open your eyes! This is a globalist technocrat power grab. Also, how will an additional two states equal 2 additional Senate seats? Yeah, it's 4 Senate seats, and they'll all go Democrat.
3
Katherine Barnes I've "visited" everywhere in CA. I was born and raised in the most conservative part of CA, which is actually in the north, not in the Valley. Either way, I rely on data, not anecdotal experiences, to make my assessments about the status quo. The land mass is irrelevant, as I'm sure you already realize. The population centers control the state, and they are all Leftist. If you can't see how this initiative will increase tech and Leftist control based on geopolitics, you quite frankly aren't paying close enough attention. I wouldn't recommend voting for this BS on a whim as a simple "oh well, f it" kind of thing. Understand that a successful outcome will equal more Democratic power. This initiative could be exactly what the Leftist elite want. Don't be their pawn.
3
Katherine Barnes The Cal 3 will not give us a "north and south separate from SF and LA." It will give us three states: one controlled by SF and the Silicon Valley; one controlled by LA, and one that will be around 45% Hispanic and will be blue within a decade.
3