Originally posted by revo
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
And so it has begun
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Sour Masher View PostAs the inevitable march of progress continues, the ever-decreasing minority of people desperate to regress have become more desperate to do any and everything they can to hold onto the old ways. It is a dangerous time, as the two sides are even enough in numbers that an all out conflict would be devastating. But time is on the side of progress for most things. Two steps forward and one back eventually moves you forward.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sour Masher View PostI would not mind that happening, but it is geographically impractical, as you have other midwestern states that would want to join the southern states. Kentucky would definitely join that movement.
And once these states secede, yeah, you'll have the Dakotas, Montana, Idaho do the same, and then parts of some states break apart.
All thanks to Donald J. Trump!
Comment
-
Originally posted by revo View PostKentucky has a Dem governor (at least for now).
And once these states secede, yeah, you'll have the Dakotas, Montana, Idaho do the same, and then parts of some states break apart.
All thanks to Donald J. Trump!
Also, if we did really split, the progressive states would end up being taken over eventually anyway. They would cut the bloated military spending and the Red states would up there's, like N and S Korea. Without any other nations big enough and invested enough to stop it, the big military red state coalition would look at how well the weaker blue states are doing and they would just take over and we'd be right back where we are now.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sour Masher View PostI just don't see it ever happening formally. The left will simply give ground on states rights to keep the US together, but that will results into what you are talking about in practice, if not in name. We had protections before against that, but with the SC as it is, more federal laws will go down, which will lead to more variance across states.
Also, if we did really split, the progressive states would end up being taken over eventually anyway. They would cut the bloated military spending and the Red states would up there's, like N and S Korea. Without any other nations big enough and invested enough to stop it, the big military red state coalition would look at how well the weaker blue states are doing and they would just take over and we'd be right back where we are now.---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Feral Slasher View PostI appreciate your cynicism....but I have to disagree with your conclusion. If the us ever broke up california, NY, illinois, DC and the NE are winning
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sour Masher View PostDo you think a country split between red and blue would have the blue side spending as much on the MIC as the red side? It would be a conflict decades in the making. A lot can change in that time.
Edit: without the "liberal agenda" to campaign against the red states would struggle. Although they would have a lot of food...hmmmm---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Feral Slasher View PostIt is all hypothetical...but all the power and money is in blue states, except for Texas.
Edit: without the "liberal agenda" to campaign against the red states would struggle. Although they would have a lot of food...hmmmm
Comment
-
Just to take Texas as an example, yes, it is 55-45 red. But that's made up of several large cities that are 65-35 blue and a lot of rural areas that are 80-20 red. Or something like that. I don't see how you have some normal secession/civil war scenario out of that.
You could probably say similar things about California, although it tips deeper blue on the whole than Texas does toward the red, there is still a major division between how the coastal cities tilt versus the inland agricultural areas."Jesus said to them, 'Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.'"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kevin Seitzer View PostJust to take Texas as an example, yes, it is 55-45 red. But that's made up of several large cities that are 65-35 blue and a lot of rural areas that are 80-20 red. Or something like that. I don't see how you have some normal secession/civil war scenario out of that.
You could probably say similar things about California, although it tips deeper blue on the whole than Texas does toward the red, there is still a major division between how the coastal cities tilt versus the inland agricultural areas.---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by revo View PostAnd just like that:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/texas-gop...054117744.htmlMore American children die by gunfire in a year than on-duty police officers and active duty military.
Comment
Comment