Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90!

New Hampshire’s population is just about double DC’s and has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators. Is it also “ungovernable?”

When we are talking about the future State of Washington Douglass Commonwealth, let’s refer to it as that, and not as “DC”

Thanks!

Honestly, whoever came up with that dumb name lost all momentum for DC statehood.

“DC” is the past

State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is the future

Just stop.

+1 to the PP who called it a dumb name. Using “state” and “commonwealth” together is unnecessarily duplicative and sounds moronic.

It may seem counterintuitive at first, but using “state” and “commonwealth” together is not duplicative

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth because it will be a state - on par with the 50 other states

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth not because our laws are a codified version of Common Law. Rather, “commonwealth” in this context refers to the people and spirit of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, coming together as one to help each other and to build together for the future

NP but it is a stupid name. It’s too long and there is already a Washington state. State of Washington would get confusing. They just need a new name.

Washington, (State of Columbia) would work. They could even keep the DC postal code (like airport codes, they don't have to match anything), or change the postal code abbreviation to WC.

If they want to be a state then they should grow up and be a state and take the name of the city out of the name.

"State of Columbia" if fine. They should just go with that and call it a day.

Washington, SC is then the city of Washington in the State of Columbia.

If they cannot be adult enough about the name to take it sufficiently seriously, then why should anyone else take statehood seriously?

Columbia is a non-starter. We will not give further honor to a greedy racist who brought nothing but death and destruction to the New World

Are you an American Indian/Indigenous person? If not, then you are the privileged beneficiary of exploration by Columbus and other European settlers. History is complicated.

So those of us whose ancestors were brought here unwillingly in chains are the privileged beneficiaries of Columbus? History is indeed complicated

Let’s focus on DC Statehood, and the name of State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth. After all, that will be the name of The District once Statehood is finalized

Frederick Douglass is an historic figure, but it's downright weird in the modern era to name a state after an individual. Next thing, they'll discover some skeleton in his historical closet and he'll be judged lacking by today's moral standards.

Of course, if statehood advocates are really serious about getting it through the 50-50 Senate, they might try Reaganana as a name.

I can see this being a Jeopardy! question sometime in the future?

Question: “This state is named in honor of two important figures in American history?”

Answer: “What is The State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just call it The Douglass Commonwealth.

So everyone will just call it “Douglass”? Because no one says I’m going to the “Commonwealth of Virginia” or “Rhode Island and Providence Plantations”.

God forbid that people actually say the official name of "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." They'll be promptly cancelled by the woke Twitterverse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90!

New Hampshire’s population is just about double DC’s and has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators. Is it also “ungovernable?”

When we are talking about the future State of Washington Douglass Commonwealth, let’s refer to it as that, and not as “DC”

Thanks!

Honestly, whoever came up with that dumb name lost all momentum for DC statehood.

“DC” is the past

State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is the future

Just stop.

+1 to the PP who called it a dumb name. Using “state” and “commonwealth” together is unnecessarily duplicative and sounds moronic.

It may seem counterintuitive at first, but using “state” and “commonwealth” together is not duplicative

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth because it will be a state - on par with the 50 other states

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth not because our laws are a codified version of Common Law. Rather, “commonwealth” in this context refers to the people and spirit of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, coming together as one to help each other and to build together for the future

NP but it is a stupid name. It’s too long and there is already a Washington state. State of Washington would get confusing. They just need a new name.

Washington, (State of Columbia) would work. They could even keep the DC postal code (like airport codes, they don't have to match anything), or change the postal code abbreviation to WC.

If they want to be a state then they should grow up and be a state and take the name of the city out of the name.

"State of Columbia" if fine. They should just go with that and call it a day.

Washington, SC is then the city of Washington in the State of Columbia.

If they cannot be adult enough about the name to take it sufficiently seriously, then why should anyone else take statehood seriously?

Columbia is a non-starter. We will not give further honor to a greedy racist who brought nothing but death and destruction to the New World

Are you an American Indian/Indigenous person? If not, then you are the privileged beneficiary of exploration by Columbus and other European settlers. History is complicated.

So those of us whose ancestors were brought here unwillingly in chains are the privileged beneficiaries of Columbus? History is indeed complicated

Let’s focus on DC Statehood, and the name of State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth. After all, that will be the name of The District once Statehood is finalized

Frederick Douglass is an historic figure, but it's downright weird in the modern era to name a state after an individual. Next thing, they'll discover some skeleton in his historical closet and he'll be judged lacking by today's moral standards.

Of course, if statehood advocates are really serious about getting it through the 50-50 Senate, they might try Reaganana as a name.

I can see this being a Jeopardy! question sometime in the future?

Question: “This state is named in honor of two important figures in American history?”

Answer: “What is The State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth”

The legal name of Washington state is “The State of Washington”. At the very least they will need to call DC the “State of East Washington”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90!

New Hampshire’s population is just about double DC’s and has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators. Is it also “ungovernable?”

When we are talking about the future State of Washington Douglass Commonwealth, let’s refer to it as that, and not as “DC”

Thanks!

Honestly, whoever came up with that dumb name lost all momentum for DC statehood.

“DC” is the past

State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is the future

Just stop.

+1 to the PP who called it a dumb name. Using “state” and “commonwealth” together is unnecessarily duplicative and sounds moronic.

It may seem counterintuitive at first, but using “state” and “commonwealth” together is not duplicative

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth because it will be a state - on par with the 50 other states

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth not because our laws are a codified version of Common Law. Rather, “commonwealth” in this context refers to the people and spirit of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, coming together as one to help each other and to build together for the future

NP but it is a stupid name. It’s too long and there is already a Washington state. State of Washington would get confusing. They just need a new name.

Washington, (State of Columbia) would work. They could even keep the DC postal code (like airport codes, they don't have to match anything), or change the postal code abbreviation to WC.

If they want to be a state then they should grow up and be a state and take the name of the city out of the name.

"State of Columbia" if fine. They should just go with that and call it a day.

Washington, SC is then the city of Washington in the State of Columbia.

If they cannot be adult enough about the name to take it sufficiently seriously, then why should anyone else take statehood seriously?

Columbia is a non-starter. We will not give further honor to a greedy racist who brought nothing but death and destruction to the New World

Are you an American Indian/Indigenous person? If not, then you are the privileged beneficiary of exploration by Columbus and other European settlers. History is complicated.

So those of us whose ancestors were brought here unwillingly in chains are the privileged beneficiaries of Columbus? History is indeed complicated

Let’s focus on DC Statehood, and the name of State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth. After all, that will be the name of The District once Statehood is finalized

Frederick Douglass is an historic figure, but it's downright weird in the modern era to name a state after an individual. Next thing, they'll discover some skeleton in his historical closet and he'll be judged lacking by today's moral standards.

Of course, if statehood advocates are really serious about getting it through the 50-50 Senate, they might try Reaganana as a name.

I can see this being a Jeopardy! question sometime in the future?

Question: “This state is named in honor of two important figures in American history?”

Answer: “What is The State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90!

New Hampshire’s population is just about double DC’s and has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators. Is it also “ungovernable?”

When we are talking about the future State of Washington Douglass Commonwealth, let’s refer to it as that, and not as “DC”

Thanks!

Honestly, whoever came up with that dumb name lost all momentum for DC statehood.

“DC” is the past

State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is the future

Just stop.

+1 to the PP who called it a dumb name. Using “state” and “commonwealth” together is unnecessarily duplicative and sounds moronic.

It may seem counterintuitive at first, but using “state” and “commonwealth” together is not duplicative

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth because it will be a state - on par with the 50 other states

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth not because our laws are a codified version of Common Law. Rather, “commonwealth” in this context refers to the people and spirit of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, coming together as one to help each other and to build together for the future

NP but it is a stupid name. It’s too long and there is already a Washington state. State of Washington would get confusing. They just need a new name.

Washington, (State of Columbia) would work. They could even keep the DC postal code (like airport codes, they don't have to match anything), or change the postal code abbreviation to WC.

If they want to be a state then they should grow up and be a state and take the name of the city out of the name.

"State of Columbia" if fine. They should just go with that and call it a day.

Washington, SC is then the city of Washington in the State of Columbia.

If they cannot be adult enough about the name to take it sufficiently seriously, then why should anyone else take statehood seriously?

Columbia is a non-starter. We will not give further honor to a greedy racist who brought nothing but death and destruction to the New World

Are you an American Indian/Indigenous person? If not, then you are the privileged beneficiary of exploration by Columbus and other European settlers. History is complicated.

So those of us whose ancestors were brought here unwillingly in chains are the privileged beneficiaries of Columbus? History is indeed complicated

Let’s focus on DC Statehood, and the name of State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth. After all, that will be the name of The District once Statehood is finalized

Frederick Douglass is an historic figure, but it's downright weird in the modern era to name a state after an individual. Next thing, they'll discover some skeleton in his historical closet and he'll be judged lacking by today's moral standards.

Of course, if statehood advocates are really serious about getting it through the 50-50 Senate, they might try Reaganana as a name.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90!

New Hampshire’s population is just about double DC’s and has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators. Is it also “ungovernable?”

When we are talking about the future State of Washington Douglass Commonwealth, let’s refer to it as that, and not as “DC”

Thanks!

Honestly, whoever came up with that dumb name lost all momentum for DC statehood.

“DC” is the past

State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is the future

Just stop.

+1 to the PP who called it a dumb name. Using “state” and “commonwealth” together is unnecessarily duplicative and sounds moronic.

It may seem counterintuitive at first, but using “state” and “commonwealth” together is not duplicative

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth because it will be a state - on par with the 50 other states

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth not because our laws are a codified version of Common Law. Rather, “commonwealth” in this context refers to the people and spirit of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, coming together as one to help each other and to build together for the future

NP but it is a stupid name. It’s too long and there is already a Washington state. State of Washington would get confusing. They just need a new name.

Washington, (State of Columbia) would work. They could even keep the DC postal code (like airport codes, they don't have to match anything), or change the postal code abbreviation to WC.

If they want to be a state then they should grow up and be a state and take the name of the city out of the name.

"State of Columbia" if fine. They should just go with that and call it a day.

Washington, SC is then the city of Washington in the State of Columbia.

If they cannot be adult enough about the name to take it sufficiently seriously, then why should anyone else take statehood seriously?

Columbia is a non-starter. We will not give further honor to a greedy racist who brought nothing but death and destruction to the New World

Are you an American Indian/Indigenous person? If not, then you are the privileged beneficiary of exploration by Columbus and other European settlers. History is complicated.

So those of us whose ancestors were brought here unwillingly in chains are the privileged beneficiaries of Columbus? History is indeed complicated

Let’s focus on DC Statehood, and the name of State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth. After all, that will be the name of The District once Statehood is finalized

Anonymous wrote:I call it our Nation’s Capital.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90!

New Hampshire’s population is just about double DC’s and has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators. Is it also “ungovernable?”

When we are talking about the future State of Washington Douglass Commonwealth, let’s refer to it as that, and not as “DC”

Thanks!

Honestly, whoever came up with that dumb name lost all momentum for DC statehood.

“DC” is the past

State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is the future

Just stop.

+1 to the PP who called it a dumb name. Using “state” and “commonwealth” together is unnecessarily duplicative and sounds moronic.

It may seem counterintuitive at first, but using “state” and “commonwealth” together is not duplicative

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth because it will be a state - on par with the 50 other states

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth not because our laws are a codified version of Common Law. Rather, “commonwealth” in this context refers to the people and spirit of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, coming together as one to help each other and to build together for the future

NP but it is a stupid name. It’s too long and there is already a Washington state. State of Washington would get confusing. They just need a new name.

Washington, (State of Columbia) would work. They could even keep the DC postal code (like airport codes, they don't have to match anything), or change the postal code abbreviation to WC.

If they want to be a state then they should grow up and be a state and take the name of the city out of the name.

"State of Columbia" if fine. They should just go with that and call it a day.

Washington, SC is then the city of Washington in the State of Columbia.

If they cannot be adult enough about the name to take it sufficiently seriously, then why should anyone else take statehood seriously?

Columbia is a non-starter. We will not give further honor to a greedy racist who brought nothing but death and destruction to the New World

Are you an American Indian/Indigenous person? If not, then you are the privileged beneficiary of exploration by Columbus and other European settlers. History is complicated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just call it The Douglass Commonwealth.

So everyone will just call it “Douglass”? Because no one says I’m going to the “Commonwealth of Virginia” or “Rhode Island and Providence Plantations”.

God forbid that people actually say the official name of "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." They'll be promptly cancelled by the woke Twitterverse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just call it The Douglass Commonwealth.

So everyone will just call it “Douglass”? Because no one says I’m going to the “Commonwealth of Virginia” or “Rhode Island and Providence Plantations”.

God forbid that people actually say the official name of "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." They'll be promptly cancelled by the woke Twitterverse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just call it The Douglass Commonwealth.

So everyone will just call it “Douglass”? Because no one says I’m going to the “Commonwealth of Virginia” or “Rhode Island and Providence Plantations”.

No, people will continue to say DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just call it The Douglass Commonwealth.

So everyone will just call it “Douglass”? Because no one says I’m going to the “Commonwealth of Virginia” or “Rhode Island and Providence Plantations”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wyoming, who are constantly cited as the reason why DC needs statehood, has a state senate with 30 members and 60 members in the house.

Imagine how ungovernable DC would be if the city council were expanded to 90!

New Hampshire’s population is just about double DC’s and has 400 Representatives and 24 Senators. Is it also “ungovernable?”

When we are talking about the future State of Washington Douglass Commonwealth, let’s refer to it as that, and not as “DC”

Thanks!

Honestly, whoever came up with that dumb name lost all momentum for DC statehood.

“DC” is the past

State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth is the future

Just stop.

+1 to the PP who called it a dumb name. Using “state” and “commonwealth” together is unnecessarily duplicative and sounds moronic.

It may seem counterintuitive at first, but using “state” and “commonwealth” together is not duplicative

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth because it will be a state - on par with the 50 other states

It will be referred to as the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth not because our laws are a codified version of Common Law. Rather, “commonwealth” in this context refers to the people and spirit of the State of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, coming together as one to help each other and to build together for the future

NP but it is a stupid name. It’s too long and there is already a Washington state. State of Washington would get confusing. They just need a new name.

Washington, (State of Columbia) would work. They could even keep the DC postal code (like airport codes, they don't have to match anything), or change the postal code abbreviation to WC.

If they want to be a state then they should grow up and be a state and take the name of the city out of the name.

"State of Columbia" if fine. They should just go with that and call it a day.

Washington, SC is then the city of Washington in the State of Columbia.

If they cannot be adult enough about the name to take it sufficiently seriously, then why should anyone else take statehood seriously?

Columbia is a non-starter. We will not give further honor to a greedy racist who brought nothing but death and destruction to the New World

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just call it The Douglass Commonwealth.

So everyone will just call it “Douglass”? Because no one says I’m going to the “Commonwealth of Virginia” or “Rhode Island and Providence Plantations”.