Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper

Liste des GroupesRevenir à ras written 
Sujet : Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper
De : jdnicoll (at) *nospam* panix.com (James Nicoll)
Groupes : rec.arts.sf.written
Date : 28. May 2025, 17:50:56
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Public Access Networks Corp.
Message-ID : <1017etg$2f0$1@reader1.panix.com>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
In article <qpae3kpe2msl12bltuq629qfikm6um827j@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>
It has not escaped my notice, BTW, that some non-Republican States
have groups in them that have been thinking along the lines of
secession (and joining Canada, if Canada is dumb enough to have them
-- accepting them would be likely to produce war with the remaining
USA, after all)

There's another, more important issue. Let's say we annex California,
and lets say we grant Californians immediate citizenship. California
has as many people living in it as all of Canada so it would displace
central Canada as the most important source of voters. And what sort
of voters would we be getting? 9,276,179 Democrats, and 6,081,697 Nazis.

For comparison, the Liberals got 8,595,488 votes, the Tories 8,113,484
votes, the Bloc 1,236,349 votes, the NPD 1,234,673 votes, and the
Greens 238,892. Oh, and the far-right People's Party got 141,210 votes.

People seem to assume those Democrats will vote Liberal but if you
waterboard Dem voters for a few weeks, it becomes clear a lot of them
would fit in better with the Tories. As for the Nazis, people might
expect they'd vote for Poilievre or whoever replaces him but not
every Tory is a baby-eating lunatic. The People's Party is a much
better fit. So, if the minority Liberal government took in California,
the effect could be to hand the Tories a majority, with the People's
Party as opposition.

Now, there are two reasonable solutions. The first is that we classify
all of the people in the new province of Trudeau as landed immigrants,
and have them go through the usual naturalization process over five or
ten years. Or, we could accept the state but not the people in it. They
could move to Nevada or Utah or whatever, and apply to emigrate to
Canada. I ran the numbers and we could process all the acceptable
ones in less than five hundred years.

(Obs we'd have to bring back the residential schools for the xAmerican
kids)

That's not even getting into how Quebec would react as French gets
bumped down from second language to third, after Spanish.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

Date Sujet#  Auteur
24 Feb 25 * (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper47James Nicoll
25 Feb 25 +* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper42Charles Packer
19 Apr 25 i`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper41Paul S Person
20 Apr 25 i +* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper3Cryptoengineer
20 Apr 25 i i`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper2James Nicoll
20 Apr 25 i i `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1James Nicoll
20 Apr 25 i +* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper36Paul S Person
20 Apr 25 i i+* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper4Scott Dorsey
20 Apr 25 i ii`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper3Bobbie Sellers
20 Apr 25 i ii `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper2Lynn McGuire
20 Apr 25 i ii  `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Bobbie Sellers
20 Apr 25 i i+* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper3William Hyde
21 Apr 25 i ii+- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Paul S Person
19 May 25 i ii`- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Robert Woodward
21 Apr 25 i i+* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper6Paul S Person
19 May 25 i ii`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper5Paul S Person
28 May 25 i ii `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper4Dimensional Traveler
28 May 25 i ii  `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper3William Hyde
28 May 25 i ii   `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper2Cryptoengineer
28 May 25 i ii    `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Bobbie Sellers
19 May 25 i i+- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
19 May 25 i i+* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper2Paul S Person
20 May 25 i ii`- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Dimensional Traveler
19 May 25 i i+* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper18Paul S Person
28 May 25 i ii`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper17Paul S Person
28 May 25 i ii `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper16James Nicoll
29 May 25 i ii  `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper15Paul S Person
29 May 25 i ii   `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper14Lynn McGuire
30 May 25 i ii    +* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper10Dimensional Traveler
30 May 25 i ii    i`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper9Scott Dorsey
30 May 25 i ii    i +* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper3Paul S Person
30 May 25 i ii    i i`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper2Scott Dorsey
31 May17:17 i ii    i i `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Paul S Person
30 May 25 i ii    i +* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper4Bobbie Sellers
31 May17:21 i ii    i i`* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper3Paul S Person
31 May18:26 i ii    i i `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper2Bobbie Sellers
31 May19:16 i ii    i i  `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Dimensional Traveler
3 Jun06:42 i ii    i `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Titus G
30 May 25 i ii    `* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper3Paul S Person
30 May 25 i ii     +- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1James Nicoll
30 May 25 i ii     `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1William Hyde
19 May 25 i i`- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1William Hyde
19 May 25 i `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Paul S Person
28 Feb 25 +* Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper2quadibloc
3 Mar 25 i`- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1WolfFan
28 Feb 25 +- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Lynn McGuire
19 May 25 `- Re: (ReacTor) Five Futures Where the US Ended Not With a Bang But a Whimper1Bobbie Sellers

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal