Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="newfie" data-source="post: 6127499" data-attributes="member: 58700">i asked Grok a hypothetical to see if it was possible to absorb canada without throwing the political balance in the US to one side or the other . still looks like the popular vote would lean blue<h3>Hypothetical Split Example</h3>
<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Red states: Alberta, Saskatchewan, rural Manitoba (~7M people) join Montana, Wyoming, or Idaho.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Blue states: Toronto, Quebec, Vancouver, Atlantic provinces (~18M) join New York, Washington, or New England.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Swing states: Suburban Ontario, parts of British Columbia, and Manitoba (~15M) could be split into new states or merged to create competitive districts.</li>
</ul>This could yield roughly equal electoral votes for both parties, maintaining the U.S.’s current political balance. However, precise redistricting would require detailed demographic and voting data analysis to ensure fairness.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="newfie, post: 6127499, member: 58700"] i asked Grok a hypothetical to see if it was possible to absorb canada without throwing the political balance in the US to one side or the other . still looks like the popular vote would lean blue [HEADING=2]Hypothetical Split Example[/HEADING] [LIST] [*][B]Red states[/B]: Alberta, Saskatchewan, rural Manitoba (~7M people) join Montana, Wyoming, or Idaho. [*][B]Blue states[/B]: Toronto, Quebec, Vancouver, Atlantic provinces (~18M) join New York, Washington, or New England. [*][B]Swing states[/B]: Suburban Ontario, parts of British Columbia, and Manitoba (~15M) could be split into new states or merged to create competitive districts. [/LIST] This could yield roughly equal electoral votes for both parties, maintaining the U.S.’s current political balance. However, precise redistricting would require detailed demographic and voting data analysis to ensure fairness. [/QUOTE]

Verification