Sound like a great deal. Canada as a single state could completely shake up the electoral status quo, as they would be basically taking a single rep from just about every state, and we would have a new California that gives something like 50 electoral votes to a single new state with a population and GDP similar to California.
Though once the GOP maths it out, either they’ll increase how many states Canada is broken into, Gerrymander it, to give conservative victories for the next two generations at least. Tons of states with a population of like 2 conservative men who all get three electoral votes per state. While Vancouver is going to have like six votes for a population of 1 million people.
In my future fiction project, Canada was parted into six states and three territories. The differences from the current ten provinces were
British Columbia renamed to just Columbia (having “British” in the name is unpatriotic)
Saskatchewan split exactly 50-50 between Alberta and Manitoba
State of Atlantica formed out of the Atlantic provinces (Newfoundland & Labrador, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island)
At the same time, the following changes were made to the Lower 48:
North Texas, South Texas, East Texas, West Texas split from Texas (see Texas divisionism)
State of Lincoln formed from Eastern Washington and the Idaho panhandle
State of Jefferson formed from Northern California and Southern Oregon
Eastern Oregon ceded to Idaho (see Greater Idaho)
As a whole, 12 new states were formed in connection with the annexation of Canada, 6 north and 6 south of the old border. Thus the Lower 48 came to be known as the Lower 54. This strategy of matching the newly annexed states with carving new states from preexisting ones was favored since it couldn’t easily be predicted how many conservative Canadians actually would vote GOP, thus splitting off regions already known to consistently vote Republican would, worst case scenario, keep the balance between Republicans and Democrats, and best case scenario give Republicans the electoral upper hand.
Sound like a great deal. Canada as a single state could completely shake up the electoral status quo, as they would be basically taking a single rep from just about every state, and we would have a new California that gives something like 50 electoral votes to a single new state with a population and GDP similar to California.
Though once the GOP maths it out, either they’ll increase how many states Canada is broken into, Gerrymander it, to give conservative victories for the next two generations at least. Tons of states with a population of like 2 conservative men who all get three electoral votes per state. While Vancouver is going to have like six votes for a population of 1 million people.
or they could just not give canadians voting rights
Sounds like an awesome idea, ngl. Absolutely Acceleration Pilled.
Puerto Rico of the North
In my future fiction project, Canada was parted into six states and three territories. The differences from the current ten provinces were
At the same time, the following changes were made to the Lower 48:
As a whole, 12 new states were formed in connection with the annexation of Canada, 6 north and 6 south of the old border. Thus the Lower 48 came to be known as the Lower 54. This strategy of matching the newly annexed states with carving new states from preexisting ones was favored since it couldn’t easily be predicted how many conservative Canadians actually would vote GOP, thus splitting off regions already known to consistently vote Republican would, worst case scenario, keep the balance between Republicans and Democrats, and best case scenario give Republicans the electoral upper hand.
Is this like that King Solomon fable where the province that isn’t willing to kill the dozen people there gets them?
No.