this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
1321 points (98.7% liked)

Progressive Politics

1112 readers
748 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Saprophyte@lemmy.world 179 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (6 children)

No, this is what we do. 51=17x3. 52=26x2. 53, however is a prime number so it can't be divided.

We make PR a state, Guam, and DC.

AND WE BECOME.... One nation, indivisible.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 44 points 3 weeks ago

You have . . . a point.

[–] NotBillMurray@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Squish the Dakotas together and make PR a state, we wouldn't even need a new flag.

[–] mitchty@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

As a former Dakotan of the north, screw South Dakota aka the lesser Dakota. North Dakota actually pays taxes unlike Switzerland of the us. A joke we had: how do you know you’re in South Dakota? Potholes every quarter mile instead of every mile in the road.

[–] ByteOnBikes 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I like your idea. But instead of squish, I say death match and we detach the loser.

[–] NotBillMurray@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

How would we detach a land locked state? I'm here for your idea, I'm just wondering about the logistics.

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

That's for after, death match first.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

No silly, we COMBINE some of the 18 low-population states so we can go back to 48! One nation 6x8, with a better balance in representation! Or 45 could be nice as well.

[–] Slab_Bulkhead@lemmy.world 24 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

overly positive elementary school teacher voice* "okay low pop states find your buddy." "to make it easier for some of you if your state starts with a cardinal direction congrats you've already got a preassigned merge buddy and new name!"... "ah no Kansas, 'Ar' is not a direction, you and Arkansas wont work you don't even share a border hun" "...unless" Kansouri-Oklasas

[–] PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Why combine extant states? Just pull a colonial Europe and draw a whole new map over it! Nuts to "natural boundaries" or "cultural similarities", everyone on the east coast from DC to King's Bay is now part of the State of Midlantic.

[–] swab148@lemm.ee 4 points 3 weeks ago

Gerrymander the state borders!

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We need to copy Canada: just give up and assign that unpopulated blob as “Northwest Territories “. All done in one move

[–] mitchty@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But even Canada gave up on that approach and is having Nunavut.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I was actually intending to phrase it like that since I thought one replaced the other but looked at a map and apparently both currently exist. Either I m looking at a bad map or haven’t paid enough attention to the news from our neighbor to the north

[–] mitchty@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 weeks ago

Heh i love making Nunavut jokes around Canadians. They split it off a while back forget the reason it’s recent ish ~25 years ago.

[–] pinkystew@reddthat.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

Just break a pool cue and force them to fight tbh

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] somethingsnappy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

No factors, still divisible.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee -3 points 3 weeks ago

Guam + Marianas would make more sense, very low populations out ðere