• Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    I can guarantee you that Oregon is absolutely not looking at Idaho.

    Idaho chose to be antivax, then flooded Oregon/Washington hospitals for treatment.

    Idaho chose to restrict women’s health services, then medical staff ran off to work in Oregon/Washington.

    While OR/WA chose to increase hourly pay, Idaho chose against it.

    The average Idaho citizen is absolutely worse off than their neighbor.

      • alliswell33 @lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        It shows how much people are fueled by culture war nonsense in rural Oregon. I lived in one of the counties that voted to join Idaho and I never heard a single reason from anybody that was reasonable. It was all based on far right talking points about transing the kids or taking the guns. Meanwhile stuff like minimum wage that would actually affect everyone was just ignored.

        • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.todayOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          10 months ago

          When people vote for something I agree with = well informed, responsible, mature adults making the right choice.

          When people vote for something I disagree with = braindead, deluded, immature savages falling victim to propaganda.

          • Lord_ToRA@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Are you saying you agree with the antivax, anti-womens rights, anti-lgbtq, anti-working class views?

            • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.todayOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              10 months ago

              I know a loaded question when I see one, and this one’s more loaded than a college freshman at a fraternity party.

                • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.todayOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Seeing as though most of eastern Oregon is predominantly agricultural, I don’t see how anti-working class fits in the picture.

                  The remainder are just weaponized political buzzwords designed to inspire people to hatred. One could just as well say pro-liberty, pro-life, and pro-family.

          • skulblaka@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            You don’t have to be stupid to fall victim to propaganda. It happens to literally everyone, every single living human being, in the modern age. We are being assaulted from all sides at all times with conflicting information.

            • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.todayOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              10 months ago

              Yes but that doesn’t mean everyone who votes a certain way is a victim of propaganda. Believe it or not, it’s actually possible to take in the arguments from both sides and then make up your mind independently of what those around you think.

          • june@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yea idk, when I disagree with something it’s usually because I’ve given it the chance to convince me and it failed. And if I agree with something it’s because I’ve taken the time to understand it. It would be a bit weird to not feel like things I agree with are the right, or better, direction and that the things I disagree with are somehow broken in their reasoning.

    • Artyom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Could you explain that to the eastern half of Oregon that unironically suggested switching to become part of Idaho about a year ago?

  • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    Can someone explain the shape of the state lines of Idaho ?

    Is it because of a geographic feature? (The squiggly side)

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        451: Unavailable due to Legal reasons greed, power, politics and discontent

        (they opted to avoid complying with completely reasonable EU law by blocking all of Europe from accessing the site)

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Then here’s the text for anyone interested:

          I have always loved the shape of Idaho—so much more interesting than so many of our rectangular neighbors in the West and Midwest. Some have described it as a fist with the index finger pointing up. Lay it on its side and it resembles a handgun.

          But Idaho wasn’t always so distinctive. When Abraham Lincoln signed the act creating Idaho Territory on March 3, 1863, it was a large rectangle that included Montana and most of Wyoming. It was a fascinating journey getting to where we are today.

          From 1849 to 1850, the southeast corner of Idaho was part of the large provisional State of Deseret (meaning “honeybee”) established by the Mormons. But Congress was not fond of the Mormons and chipped away at their proposed state, giving portions to surrounding territories, including Idaho, and leaving what is now Utah, “the Beehive State.”

          Until 1863, Idaho was part of Washington Territory. When Idaho petitioned Congress to create a new territory, two competing versions of its territorial boundaries were presented to the Senate. The first was created by Lieutenant John Mullan and would have kept the Idaho panhandle and part of Montana in Washington Territory leaving southern Idaho and Wyoming as the new Idaho Territory. Idaho Territory Map

          The final plan gave Washington its current boundaries and created a very large new Idaho Territory that included not only all of present-day Idaho, but also virtually all of Montana and Wyoming. Courtesy Idaho Senate

          The people in western Washington were eager to get rid of present-day Idaho and Montana. Washington’s territorial capital was in Olympia, but the discovery of gold in Idaho caused an influx of population further east. Eventually, Walla Walla became more geographically centered for the capital, but only if the Idaho panhandle was retained. Mullan owned property in Walla Walla and was working to establish it as the capital.

          At the same time, Mullan’s political rival, William H. Wallace, was promoting his own plan with the Senate. Wallace was Washington’s territorial delegate to Congress and, as a resident of Puget Sound, wanted to keep the capital in Olympia. Wallace’s plan gave Washington its current boundaries and created a very large new Idaho Territory that included not only all of present-day Idaho, but also virtually all of Montana and Wyoming. On the last day of the 37th Congress, debate went well into the night. After midnight on March 4, 1863, Wallace’s bill was passed by Congress and later that day was signed by President Lincoln.

          Mullan had hoped to become governor of the new Idaho Territory, but was again outmaneuvered by Wallace. Wallace was already a close friend of Lincoln and a fellow Republican whose plan had prevailed in Congress. Lincoln appointed him Idaho’s first territorial governor on March 10, 1863. Idaho Territory Map

          The final plan gave Washington its current boundaries and created a very large new Idaho Territory that included not only all of present-day Idaho, but also virtually all of Montana and Wyoming. Courtesy Idaho Senate

          Lewiston, on the western edge of this vast new Idaho Territory, was selected as the capital. When the territorial legislature met in the winter of 1863, at least one delegate from present-day Montana, reluctant to travel across the treacherous Bitterroot mountains, journeyed all the way to the Pacific coast then took a boat up the Columbia and Snake rivers to Lewiston. It didn’t take long for those first legislators to unanimously request their own territory. The very next year, Montana withdrew from Idaho Territory. Idaho wanted the Continental Divide to become the border between the two territories, but Montana’s proposal to establish the Bitterroot Mountains as the boundary was approved by Congress before Idaho could even communicate its objection.

          As we celebrate Idaho Day on March 3, we are reminded that Idaho’s boundaries were determined by greed, power, politics, and discontent, but also perhaps by the same Divine Destiny that formed this great nation. We may live in two time zones, but one state. We may be separated by steep mountains and deep canyons, but joined in purpose. We are One. We are Idaho.

  • Jo Miran
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    Fun Fact: Montana and Wyoming used to be part of Idaho.

  • fossphi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Is this something I’m too unamerican to understand?

  • angrymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    A as non English native I can’t see Wyoming without pronouncing “mhamm mhaam” in my head… Holy fuck this is stupid.