WI the US annexes Baja California?

San Diego is still the main US Navy base on the West Coast due to its excellent natural harbor. Tijuana isn't the city it is today since it's growth was largely spurred by its close proximity to San Diego, instead the entire Mexican Gold Coast is simply more suburban sprawl from San Diego proper.
 

Brunaburh

Banned
This is one of the smaller POD's, internationally speaking, it's entirely plausible and wouldn't hurt Mexico much. They might have never been invaded by the French, given the USA would presumably have paid more, leaving a better financial situation. US side of things, well, if it's an independent state, it's another left leaning Pacific state, probably more marginal elections go blue (or whatever TTL). If not, it is a part of massive union dominating behemoth California. Which is a good thing.
 
San Diego is still the main US Navy base on the West Coast due to its excellent natural harbor. Tijuana isn't the city it is today since it's growth was largely spurred by its close proximity to San Diego, instead the entire Mexican Gold Coast is simply more suburban sprawl from San Diego proper.

San Diego may possibly be much bigger. Part of the reason that LA grew after the 1906 SanFran earthquake is that the railroad didn't stretch as far as San Diego's excellent harbor so shipping traffic went to LA instead. However, if Baja is a state there's going to be a big push to connect it to the US and build a railroad all the way down the west coast. That means when the 1906 earthquake happens and SanFran's harbor is out of commission San Diego will be the best harbor in California with a rail connection. San Diego then gets the snowballing growth that LA got in our history. LA in this timeline is likely a mid-sized city.
 
Last edited:
San Diego may possibly be much bigger. Part of the reason that LA grew after the 1906 SanFran earthquake is that the railroad didn't stretch as far as San Diego's excellent harbor so shipping traffic went to LA instead. However, if Baja is a state there's going to be a big push to connect it to the US and build a railroad all the way down the west coast. That means when the 1906 earthquake happens and SanFran's harbor is out of commission San Diego will be the best harbor in California with a rail connection. San Diego then gets the snowballing growth that LA got in our history. LA in this timeline is likely a mid-sized city.

That's an interesting thought. I do agree San Diego will be a lot bigger since it isn't going to be boxed in by the ocean, the mountains to its east and the border. LA, however, still possesses a good port with San Pedro-Long Beach so I think they will still experience sustained growth. There are also still the same conditions as OTL for the film industry to plant its feet there.

But with a ton of land now open to the south of San Diego I think it's likely Camp Pendleton isn't located where it is today and is instead somewhere a bit further south of San Diego. This could result in the LA and San Diego metro areas basically merging with a continuous stretch of beachside communities stretching all the way down the coast instead of being interrupted by the Marine base.
 
Would the international border go down the midline of the Gulf of California? Probably more commerce between US La Paz/Cabo and Mexico's Nayarit and Jalisco states.
 
Cabo San Lucas becomes a resort town more quickly than IOTL, most likely, but there are just as many Americans living there today :p
 
Maybe Baja becomes another Florida and you get a ton of retirees moving down there and holidaygoers going there due to the good weather and beaches
 
Maybe Baja becomes another Florida and you get a ton of retirees moving down there and holidaygoers going there due to the good weather and beaches
This looks likely.
It would be kind of like a mix of NM and FL OTL, presumably - quite Hispanic, but a big elderly white population.
 
Just to keep in mind in reference to any splitting of a state you need the state to agree to it and California refused an attempt by congress in the 1850's to divide it.
 
I agree with that, @thekingsguard; will it be divided at the Missouri Compromise line, or as OTL? And, will South California be admitted as a slave state?

More likely it would probably follow something like the old Upper/Lower California division from Spanish colonial days inherited by Mexico when it became independent, which was based on which Catholic order operated missions in which region - one of them had missions operated by the Dominicans, while the other one had missions operated by the Franciscans. In that case, Lower California will probably be a territory for a very long time, while Upper California would be, well, the State of California IOTL with a minor coastal extension. And that's all there is to it, unless there arises a possibility to resurrect the State of Jefferson and/or implementing a north/south split in Upper California.
 
Just to keep in mind in reference to any splitting of a state you need the state to agree to it and California refused an attempt by congress in the 1850's to divide it.

They finally agreed to in about 1861 or so, but the proposal came to Congress just a bit after Fort Sumter, when they had bigger fish to fry. :p
 
Top