this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
992 points (97.1% liked)

Political Memes

5413 readers
3208 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Californians are welcome to try to split into multiple states if they would like more Senators.

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Really? Please explain. Like, I get the DEI joke, but the fact all these little states are red isn't some law of the Universe. They have been blue and can be again.

Unless I'm missing some deeper joke? Apparently I am unless the down votes are just circlejerking.

EDIT: Maybe you all think the Senate should be determined by population? If so, that's what the House is for. Uncap it.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It's not that it should be by population. It's that the idea of the senate itself is outdated.

Now the cities are the source of almost all of America's wealth, power, education, and population, but they are forced to bend the knee to a tiny portion of the country. The whole system is way out of wack.

Carving up California into more states wouldn't fix that, as it would still put more power into fewer hands.

[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I just disagree.

The Senate is where the States have equal representation regardless of size, that's the point of it. The House is meant to be where California's population makes the difference, but the cap needs to be removed, imo.

Without a Senate, the most populous states drag everyone else around by sheer weight. That's not sustainable.

Also, as someone who has experienced life in both rural and urban America, city people have lots of misunderstandings about how people in small communities live and make bad decisions based on those misunderstandings as well. It's not like country folk have a monopoly on that shit.

EDIT: Just want to acknowledge the point I think you're trying to make about minority (often religiously motivated) groups passing laws that affect huge populations in cities where we have to live with each other. I totally get it, just to be clear.

[–] Redfugee@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Conversely, with a Senate the least populous states drag everyone else around by having a disproportionate amount of voting power in the Senate, just because of the state they happen to be in.

[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

No? I think I see what you mean, but the States all have equal power in the Senate so its more like tug-of-war and coalition building.

Again, imo, the House is really where California's 500 pound Gorilla status should come into play but the cap means tiny States hold disproportionately waaaaaaay too much sway. The Reds should not currently control the House, not even close.

[–] Redfugee@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I guess I'm not entirely convinced that states need to be represented at all.

If we compare a voter in California to a voter in Wyoming, the person in Wyoming has a much stronger influence in the Senate and the judicial branch given that justices are confirmed soely by the Senate. Why should one voter have more power than another? Seems arbitrary to me.

[–] Zannsolo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The house and electoral college need to be tied directly to population. It's already a clown fest give California 65 reps to Wyoming's one