Consider West Virginia. It broke away from Virgina and became a state.
Next look at how the countries in the state voted in 2016. (Link)
It's entirely possible that many, many counties will want to remain in the Union.its also possible, given the precedent, these counties will break away from California.
The delusion that Calexit has is that the urban areas will drag the state away. Unlikely.
Then there is the federal property, national parks, military installation, etc. what to do?
Finally, there is power and water. California draws much of it from surrronding states. The Colorado River is divided among several states. California gets half of the rivers flow. No doubt the other states will find it advantageous to get rid of California. Colorado, with a water surplus already objects to California drawing on the surplus.

Possible that California's urban areas could form their of nation. However, much of the bounty from our nation won't flow to them.

https://www.google.com/search?...mgrc=N_ktJf50jDtpkM:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...lorado_River_Compact
http://www.foxnews.com/politic...s-off-our-water.html

PR64 WE'RE SENDING IN AN EMERGENCY EVAC TEAM. WE'RE GONNA CHOPPER YOU OUT OF THERE

STAND BY

Short of a Biblical Earth Quake that physically snaps along fault lines, California will not ever be separated from the USA

California would be a great state, but for the Californians.

Drive them into the sea and Make California Great Again.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
PR64 WE'RE SENDING IN AN EMERGENCY EVAC TEAM. WE'RE GONNA CHOPPER YOU OUT OF THERE

STAND BY

Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs_OacEq2Sk

We can't get rid of Puerto Rico, and they're not even a state. What makes anyone think we could get rid of Commiefornia?

If someone can figure out how, though, count me in!

This segment is pretty funny...
Almost parody:



People in California are calling for a 'Calexit' from the US in the wake of Trump's win
https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...935/m/8870047314/p/1

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
PR64 WE'RE SENDING IN AN EMERGENCY EVAC TEAM. WE'RE GONNA CHOPPER YOU OUT OF THERE

STAND BY

Thanks Para....

California gets a lot of its water and electricity from neighboring states and does not have enough of either within the state to satisfy its needs. It cannot survive without assistance from its neighbors. For that reason alone, it would not make sense for it to just secede from the Union (if such would even be permitted).

Division into several smaller states is a viable option (given it would be allowed), but if done the wrong way would be disastrous in the Senate because it would result in several more solid Democrats there, and I think most of us here would decry that result. I would not support any split that did not lump SF and LA into one entity, with the rest of the state split however it wanted to. (Keep all the Liberals in one group--they deserve each other.)

flashguy

Kinda sounds like Tucker is against the exit. I don't know how the whole state of Georgia would vote but I damn sure wouldn't fight to keep California. I'd be a whole lot more willing to fight to kick them out.

I'd move to Eastern Oregon if we split E/W. Bend is a growing problem though. WA could use a split too.

Even my daughter says it now every time we drive back from a tournament in San Diego and cross the bridge over the Colorado River,

"Welcome back to the United States of America."

I'm having trouble determining if this is a serious effort, or just the ranting of a few lunatics. If they plan a statewide referendum, they should do the electorate the honor of presenting them with the constitution they would live under.

More realistically, CA if successful, would inherit 1/50 of the US debt. Which would be unserviceable by the fledgling nation.

Most likely, you would see corruption on a scale of the Clinton/Soros Foundations combined.

There would be mass migration from CA to the US, including illegals as CA descends into bankruptcy.

In all probability, the socialist, limousine liberals will be dissatisfied with their utopia and repatriate themselves to the US.


California would not be recognizable as it stands now.

Of course, in due time Mexico will flex its muscle when their La Rosa units start forming up and arms are smuggled from the South America and Mexico.

Drug cartels will have a free hand as CA won’t be in the position to project power.


Be careful for what you wish for.

quote:

Be careful for what you wish for.

Maybe what is wished for is this being a plan for eventual takeover of California by Mexico, disguised as California being a sovereign nation.

I think their share of the debt paid in full before exit is per capita. Since they are so big on counting non citizens, we'll accommodate them this one time.

I doubt anything would ever come of this wet dream, but if so the resulting chaos could possibly result in the deaths of tens of thousands.

quote:

I think their share of the debt paid in full before exit is per capita. Since they are so big on counting non citizens, we'll accommodate them this one time.

Debt is one problem...
Lack of assets is another.

They can't exactly sell off half of the land to pay the debt when it's already owned by the Federal government.

Federal land ownership by state (as of 2013)
State: California
Federal land acreage: 45,864,800
Total state acreage: 100,206,720
Percentage of federal land: 45.8%

Well, wait a minute. Apparently California owns 2,243,600 acres in the state.

http://www.nrcm.org/documents/publiclandownership.pdf

That's going to include land that's essentially unusable (rest stops, flood plains, areas particularly subject to landslides and fires, etc.), but that also includes beachfront property and areas like the Presidio in San Francisco. The state could shake loose a little cash if it had to.

It's a funny thing about bankrupt people. They don't like to have their property sold to service their debts.

I see California dividing into multiple states long before they secede from the union. They need Uncle Sugar and the rest of us in flyover land to pay for their social programs, and they know it.

So, shall we trade the odd one-time federal support payment for, say, permanent federal ownership of water?