[Dilbert San Diego]

This could be a political boon for Democrats.

Why? Because instead of 2 senators from California, there would be 12 senators from what is now California.

Currently both senators are Democrat. But in adding new states, adding 10 more senators, it’s likely that 6 or 7 of these new senators would be Democrats.

[Eccl 10:2]

“This could be a political boon for Democrats.

Why? Because instead of 2 senators from California, there would be 12 senators from what is now California.

Currently both senators are Democrat. But in adding new states, adding 10 more senators, it’s likely that 6 or 7 of these new senators would be Democrats.”

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Indeed. However, I would be open to an idea like this IF there was a one-for-one tradeoff via consolidating some of the Eastern states. I would like to see MA-VT-NH-CT-RI be made one state. I would also like to see DE and MD combine.

That gets rid of 5 states and allows for 5 new ones.

I could live with that.

[DJ Taylor]

What a great idea this is!

It would give us five more Barbara Boxers and five more Dianne Feinsteins in the U.S. Senate, and we desperately need that. /S

[Michael.SF.]

Which then means three to four would be Republican and California's 55 EV's would now be 44-11 (0r so).

I will take that over the alternative.

[Parley Baer]

“This could be a political boon for Democrats”

That is the way I see it and therefore will not vote for it.

[Cyman]

Why? Because instead of 2 senators from California, there would be 12 senators from what is now California..

Exactly! (shuddering)

[upcountryhorseman]

The whole problem is: the northern, rural parts of California don’t get represented in The Senate. I suspect
these areas would vote Republican.