And there's a sad irony in this, and in other posts here: Scump got more votes out of California than he did in many of his red states combined. Sure, he only got 31% of the California vote, but he does have supporters there other than Devin Nunes. "No electoral votes, no help. No tickee no shirtee." Second President of the Confederacy
Again there are a few blue states that have a small population. Under the same reasoning a voter in DE has 30 times as much voting power as a voter in TX. Also Democrats can still win in small Red states. MT has a Democrat governor and Senator and there is a good shot could have two Senators. The Dakotas have had Democrat governor and senators. Tom Daschle and McGovern were long time Democratic giants. Maybe it's because I've been living for awhile now in a state that has a population only slightly larger than the Houston Metro Area but I'm fine with having two US Senators per state.
Well there are far more less densly populated red states than blue states. The only solid highly populated red state is Texas. Florida is purple.
Someone must have beat some sense into trump's head, or someone in the administration did it without telling trump... amazing it was even a question in the first place...
Looks like Keven McCarthy has some form of spine after all. https://www.politico.com/states/cal...of-emergency-aid-for-california-fires-1326169 McClintock: Trump will reverse FEMA denial of emergency aid for California fires Rep. Tom McClintock said Friday that President Donald Trump has agreed to reverse his administration's decision to deny federal cleanup funding for six wildfires, including the largest single fire in state history located in the Republican-heavy Central Valley. Impact: McClintock, a Republican who represents fire-struck regions of California, said in a tweet that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy told him that Trump would issue a disaster declaration providing funding to clean up fire debris. That comes despite the Federal Emergency Management Agency's denial of Gov. Gavin Newsom's request earlier this week. "The Presidential Disaster Declaration is imminent and help is on the way," he wrote. FEMA representatives didn't respond immediately to a request for comment. Background: FEMA denied Newsom's request for federal cost-sharing on the Creek Fire and five others just a day after agreeing to take on all state costs of debris removal and emergency protective measures for a separate set of wildfires from August. California is experiencing the worst fire season in its recorded history, with over 4.1 million acres burned, 31 deaths and 9,200-plus structures damaged or destroyed so far. Political fallout: A Republican state lawmaker earlier Friday slammed the initial decision to deny the funding. "This should have been a no brainer," Assemblyman Jim Patterson (R-Fresno) told reporters at a virtual press conference. "Something went wrong in the calculations of what FEMA did." He said elected officials were working on the administration to reverse the decision. “Quite frankly, FEMA just blew it," he said. "The fact of the matter is that they are reconsidering now. There's a lot of effort from elected representatives and we think that there's a high probability that they will recognize the problem and will fix it." What's next: Patterson said the Creek Fire debris needs to be cleaned up before rains start in late October or early November in order to prevent it from contaminating the San Joaquin River watershed. He praised the California Office of Emergency Services for quickly responding to his request for expedited funding under the California Disaster Assistance Act, which allows the state to reimburse local governments for cleanup costs. "I think we're going to see debris getting out of there very, very soon, perhaps even in a day or so," he said.
