Am I the only one who’s noticed this?
I’m not taking this too seriously, because I don’t think he is either. The President-Elect is having fun reminding the world that the United States makes waves when it has a President in office. That’s not surprising. What is surprising is that the gut-clutching crybabies called the Mainstream Media haven’t already started raising hell about Trump’s talk of adding Canada as a 51st State, Mexico as a 52nd, and Greenland as a U.S. territory, not to mention foreclosing on the Panama Canal for breach of contract.
No, he hasn’t been talking in terms of warfare but of tariffs, purchases, and economic surrenders to the reality of U.S. North American hegemony. Even to me, though, it seems to undermine the campaign rhetoric about America First, rejuvenation of the Monroe doctrine, and peace through strength, meaning no foreign wars or entanglements unless they’re absolutely necessary. Already, the Mexican cartels, the tinpot martinet in charge of Panama, the Government(?) of Greenland, and even Nancy-boy Trudeau are sounding bellicose about Trump’s jocular disrespect of their sovereignty, such as it is.
There’s quite enough to do here at home without thinking about adding the catastrophic ills of also-ran nations to our own. Talking that way may be fun, but please don’t destroy the good mood so many Americans are in.
Speaking of good moods, though, I am also concerned about all the speechifying on how damn quick the economic turnaround is going to be. Never did think it would be quick. We’re in for a very messy two years at least, until the 2026 mid-terms slow things down for a while, and even with all the edicts dumped in the first half day of a Trump presidency, results will be delayed in coming. Big ships require a lot of time and space to turn around in. Good intentions don’t turn an aircraft carrier into a jet ski. Don’t build a too tall ramp to an injurious letdown. That’s just common sense. As if the Trumpsters don’t know what I mean by the term.
All that said, I am in a much better mood than I was back in the month of October. If I had a personal physician, I’m sure he would be amazed that my heart is still so strong after the cardiac strain of watching Kamala slur her way into the campaign record books while expensively educated journalists couldn’t see anything wrong with her qualifications for the White House. Politicians and prostitutes may have a lot in common, but their skills are by no means identical. Kamala was never anything but a placeholder in the race. Now she’s getting jolly drunk at parties while her pimp licks his wounds at the Vineyard.
Probably have more year end thoughts next week or so. Enjoy the holiday season.
UPDATE 1/8/25: Trump held a press conference yesterday, at which he repeated his expansionist ideas about Canada and Greenland and his reclamation intentions with regard to the Alabama Canal. The MSM is predictably stunned and outraged about upsetting the global applecart in this way, although the sea of rotting apples from the southern border throughout the 50 states still hasn’t reached their nostrils.
My wife found this graphic somewhere and forwarded it to me. Have to say it’s the first female rendition of Trump I’ve encountered, a clear attempt to turn their alarm into ridicule. My only objection to the angelic depiction is that in this incarnation he obviously needs an appropriate makeover of his coif.
UPDATE 2, 1/8/25, 2 PM: All right. I did the math. The idea of Canada becoming part of the United States won’t fly. It comes down to population, Senate seats, House seats, and Electoral College votes.
~41 million people in Canada and ~330 million in the U.S. The new pop. Total would be ~371 million. Canada would be 11 percent of the total. How does this affect political equilibrium in the U.S.?
The 41M does not rule out the viability of making Canada, as Trump has delineated it, the 51st state. A single huge chunk of territory with a population approximately equal to California’s 39M. That means two U.S. Senators, hardly a deal breaker on political balance in the nation.
The apportionment of House seats would be trickier. The Constitution caps the total number of members at 435. Other states would lose seats Canada, though not the ones that only have one at present. California currently has 52 seats. Doing the math, they would retain ~89 percent of that apportionment, or 46 seats. Similar adjustments in other states would provide the State Canada with ~48 seats. The question of how to apportion these Canadian House seats becomes problematical however. As we can see from the population density map above, an overwhelming percentage,of Canadians live in areas within about 100-200 miles from the U.S. border. If all the House members are allocated to these borderline regions, most of Amanda would be left without Congressional representation for their distinctly different needs and priorities.
In other words, Canada would need something like an Electoral College to apportion House seats in a way that does not reflect anything like a pure one man/one vote democracy. It would rather be a republic within a republic.
Now that we’ve mention the Electoral College, we can see at once the fatal flaw in the “one state” solution to Canada’s status in the nation. The math that works for calculating fair and manageable numbers for the Senate and House turns into a dealbreaker when Electoral College apportionments are factored in.
There are 538 total Electoral votes. California has 54 Electoral votes, reflecting electoral balancing logic among states; 89 percent of 54 is 48, Cali’s new number of Electoral votes. Canada’s number would be 50. It would no longer be possible to win the Presidency without winning at California OR Canada. Winning both is a guarantee for whichever party does it. The only remaining ones that matter are the bloc of six northeastern states that always or nearly always vote blue. Unless the other 43 break very heavily in the opposite direction, there’s no chance of victory at all.
It doesn’t fly. Republicans will never go for a Canada as one state solution. Problem is, the way around creating a monolithic electoral bloc amounting to a second California is to divide Canada into about six separate states, which can be gerrymandered to provide rural and wilderness regions with representation that might sometimes “swing” a state away from uniformly urban domination. That’s not the likeliest of scenario us and it Carrie’s another huge penalty. Each of the six new Canadian states gets two U.S. Senators, which would seriously distort the balance of power in that key legislative body. Again, Republicans are unlikely to go for it.
What are we left with? The fate of Canada as a Trump negotiating point. They are incredibly dependent on us economically. With Trudeau they have created a national mess for themselves even worse than what Biden has wrought here in fewer years. They are being told, via the jocularity of the Canada as 51st state, that they are at most the tail,of a dog they cannot wag. So better cooperate on matters of the border and trade, or the many courtesy protections so long provided to Canada by the U.S., including military protection, will be withdrawn. Little Brother is never go to inherit the business. Get used to it.
Comments
Post a Comment