https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1834543.html
Latest source of American seethe lmao.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1834543.html
Latest source of American seethe lmao.
It does kinda make sense. Hopefully will open the gate to giving taxed 'provinces' rights down the road.
Although I am sure it will become political fast. And honestly, it probably is. Usually when a powerful group is doing something right for a helpless group its not because they give a shit about whats right, its because its in the direction that supports their power structure. I doubt anyone will question the fact that increasing electoral college power in an area that favors one group was not a factor in such a move.
Both party's can go fuck themselves. Hopefully that group of people gets a bit of representation out of the degusting political power struggle in the end.
Well it will obviously give democrats 2 more senate seats and some of the moral arguments supporting it are pretty fake (like WE MUST GIVE REPRESENTATION TO ALL US CITIZENS!.... but not those from puerto rico, guam, samoa, virgin islands, mariana islands...)
However one thing that is unique for dc vs. the other non-represented is they do pay federal income tax.
but i don't think it's currently possible or wise. They would need to drop the fillibuster and for manchin to agree which would be politically stupid for him to do so (2 more democratic senators and now he no longer has the power of being the swing vote).
And it invites the republicans to do the same thing if they are able to retake control in 2022. Like.. need more senate seats? Just split some red states in half! East and west texas!
Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?
DC had a very recent referendum where they pretty overwhelmingly voted in favour of statehood. Puerto Rico's desire for statehood is a bit shakier, but if they want to then they should be a state IMO. Likewise with Guam. I think the US Virgin Islands and Samoa are likely too small to become states, also I don't think they support statehood either.
Your last sentence isn't just a hypothetical. Republicans wanting more power in the senate is quite literally the reason that there are two Dakotas: https://www.ndstudies.gov/gr4/early-...on-6-statehood.
Last edited by oops_ur_dead; April 20th, 2021 at 01:19 PM.
Oh I'm well aware, but the party itself has already set the precedent for doing it. Whether or not they "switched positions", the Republican party continues to benefit from that decision, given that both Dakotas have remained strongly Republican to this day.
Texas actually can become 4 states at will to my limited understanding. Would be a pretty big change on many levels and I think it was written into something when Texas joined the USA. (We also are the only state that owns our coast which is fucking huge money wise)
These struggles have always existed but the thing I dislike is that the focus in politics has been heavily shifting twords messing with the 'system' itself in recent years. Actions like messing with electoral college votes or stacking out the supreme court when its not in your favor is a slippery slope (no fallacy intended) and a pattern that lead up to the civil war. I think there is a substantial difference between competing within decided rules and focusing on changing the rules.
Not to say that democrats are the only ones doing it at all. That was a huge focus during the Trump administration and its underscored by his attempt to coup and grab power after the fact or push public perception of a rigged election.
My point is that this new focus by the two power structure is dangerous. Especially so in a political climate of 'Well he did this toooo' rules king and justifies unjust actions to the polarized public..
I kinda wonder.. With people like Trump leading republicans to some extent how far do you think things will go if the system totally shifts in favor of democrats? Say DC becomes a state and Texas takes in so many people from California and New York it votes democrat.. Republicans will know their power is gone and there is nothing more dangerous than taking power away from powerful people. I wonder how extreme they would be willing to be in an attempt to get that power back. Could it fracture the United states again? Or maybe justify another more committed coup?
Im curious how the next 10 years is gona play out although right now I am more focused on interest rates hiking next year.
i just see this as another change that won't impact my life at all...
when trump got elected, i thought the world was going to end, but i can't think of a single way he directly affected my life---besides maybe giving me a tax break in the amount of a few dollars? idek what he did with taxes tbh
biden got elected, democrats r known for helping the poor, so good news for me i guess. only benefit i see rn though is um, more guaranteed mediciaid lol
i don't remember if trump wanted to get rid of obamamcare or mdiciaid... fckinrg kill me pls
Spoiler : Slightly off-topic :
"Two wrongs don't make a right" is a principle that is tragically often forgotten. If people would just keep that in mind, the issue of a polarized people justifying unjust actions Helz talked about would not exist.
As for the matter of statehood itself, "no taxation without representation" looks like a legitimate argument to me, and the same principle applies to any other place that would be under the same conditions and that could reasonably be granted statehood, i.e. that would be big enough.