Ok, I see now.
Well, there’s always Saudi Arabia…
When it comes to Quebec it’s really both. Quebec also has a strong homegrown entertainment industry (music, film, television, etc) that keeps the public happy, entertained, and insulated. The Quebec government also subsidizes language education programs for non-French speaking Quebeckers to learn French (great resource).
On the flip side, settlement by non-French speaking people is discouraged through the use of strong language laws that prevent employment and a lack of publicly funded education for anglo/allophones (somewhat rightly IMO). The political climate of Quebec, being as it is, just would not allow for the absorption of their nation into that of a large anglophone empire.
The rest of Canada would also not be happy being engulfed (what would happen to PEI or the territories?), but I’d be a complete non-starter in relation to Quebec.
Well, to play the game suggested in the OP you kind of have to posit a fantasy scenario where Canada peacefully chooses to unify with the USA. There is no real life chance of that happening, but it’s kind of what the OP implies. If not, then you can forget everything everyone’s said, and the most popular political party would be the Canadian Independence Party.
Well, Ok, how bout this:
Quebec separates. Canada is split into two non-adjoining parts. Newfoundland and Labrador, the most recent provincial addition, a well as other maritime provinces, decide over a few years to petition to join the US. Over time, BC decides its economic bread is buttered down south, and also petitions to join the US. After this, it’s just a matter of time for the rest, minus Quebec, which eventually requests to join, with certain guarantees regarding language and culture.
In regards the OP
Republicans get 1/3 to 1/2 of the Conservatives.
Democrats get the rest, plus the liberals and the NDP.
The politicians representing former Canadian territory would form a block to promote secession from the USA while at the same time aggressively pressing their constitutents’ interim interests by being the block that will decide any split vote.
This would lead the USA to either getting rid of us, or adopting what Canadians had before unification, such as more effective and less expensive socialized health care for all, socialized education, a social safety net, a rational banking system with competent government oversight, a judiciary that is much more independent of politics, an election system that functions cleanly, equalization payments between the have and have not states, inclusion of the Canadian body of law into the American body of law, including our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the case law that has developed out of it (especially linguistic and minority protection), and on a nation wide basis, abortion, same sex marriage, gun control including very strict restrictions on handguns, automatic and semi-automatic weapons, large clips, and heavy ordnance.
In short, inclusion of Canada would probably lead to an exodus of red states. Not a bad thing, when you think about it.
The hypothetical assumes the provinces join the Union peacefully and willingly; that means secession is probably a political dead-letter back home.
. . . Only 1/3 to 1/2?! The Canadian political center-of-gravity is really that far to the left of the U.S.', is it?!
Who would Candians vote for if they could vote in the USA election: Obama 78%, Romney 12%.
In other words, another 68 electoral votes for the Democrats, which themselves would be moved far to the left when picking their candidate.
Dead letter? No. Something we are well aware of in Canada is that playing the secession button and actually seceding are two very different things. Something that you must expect is that unification would not be once and always settled, and that instead it would only be a solid as the ongoing benefits conveyed to the Canadians, who in turn would play this for all it is worth.
Wait, this is something you do now?!
The Canadian centre is significantly to the left of the Democrats.
Yes, very much so. Quebec.
Being Remembrance Day, lets look at the military for a moment. In Canada we are used to our peace dividend, as contrasted with the USA’s military culture. I don’t expect that your red states would take kindly to the Canadians dramatically reducing the portion of American GDP devoted to the military, or to the Canadians getting the USA more in line with the UN.
. . . :eek: . . . 
. . . My dear Canucks, is there some way I could persuade you to join the Union? Pretty please? It would be impolite to refuse. We promise to go metric.
Well… OK, but the capital has to move to Ottawa, and Puerto Rico should be given statehood, oh and the economic blockade of Cuba has to stop
I don’t think a union would be remotely possible, given that the USA could not be expected to dump its red states. The social gap is far too great.
I expect that a closer economic association will continue to develop, e.g. removal of trade barriers (typically something on which Rebublican Americans and Conservative Canadians often agree upon), homologation on policing and security, integration of transportation (particulalry rail, marine and air), integration of energy (elecrtrical and fossil), and general standardization of regulations in many areas to reduce inefficiencies.
By analogy, you work closely with the fellow at the office, spending more time with him than you do with your own spouse, but you don’t marry him.
OECD says Canada to lead G7 in growth for next 50 years.
Canada and the USA are each other’s trade greatest trade partners.
This has been accomplished without the political unification of our two countries, so something sweeter than being top of the G7 (in growth for Canada and in size by the USA) and being economically dependant upon each other would have to be put on the table to encourage Canada to sacrifice it’s sovereignity, and to encourage the USA to make a giant leap to the left.
What would that enticement or combination of enticements be for each of our nations?
Claiming to be able to make a 50-year prediction about such a thing is mesmerizingly stupid. This prediction isn’t worth the paper it isn’t written on.
[QUOTE=Wilfrid Laurier in 1904]
the 20th century shall be filled by Canada.
[/QUOTE]
Well, we can still make a clean break for the 21st. Right guys?