New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Secede Already?

The good news is...that you won't have to wait too much longer. I doubt you and I will see it, but our children or grandchildren will see a Balkanization of the US.
 
So many untruths in the first four or five paragraphs that I couldn't finish reading it. Is this meant to be actual commentary, or satire?
 
"New Dixie" would collapse within a year. At the least, from inter-sectarian fights as they try to "out-pure" themselves.....e.g. those who would claim an individual has a right to own their own tank, versus a Red State Government that would be trying to prevent their State from collapsing into a warlordship.
 
GordonGecko said:
"New Dixie" would collapse within a year. At the least, from inter-sectarian fights as they try to "out-pure" themselves.....e.g. those who would claim an individual has a right to own their own tank, versus a Red State Government that would be trying to prevent their State from collapsing into a warlordship.
Click to expand...

One of the untruths in the "commentary" is that there is any sort of reasonable geographic political split. Mostly the split is urban/rural, not north/south. If you look at a precinct map of even a "blue" state like California, it votes "red" everywhere but in its urban cores.
 
It's pathetic. Besides if the South does go who is going to bail California, Illnois, NY (to name just a few) out when they go belly up? Hard to do without Texas for example........funny the person who wrote the article does not mention any of that in his socialist utopia he describes.
 
trapdoor said:
One of the untruths in the "commentary" is that there is any sort of reasonable geographic political split. Mostly the split is urban/rural, not north/south. If you look at a precinct map of even a "blue" state like California, it votes "red" everywhere but in its urban cores.
Click to expand...

trap, for "some reason" the GOP has a lock on Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee. Or are there lots of liberals in the rural areas and the cities are overrun with rightwingers in those states?
 
Sickofleft said:
It's pathetic. Besides if the South does go who is going to bail California, Illnois, NY (to name just a few) out when they go belly up? Hard to do without Texas for example........funny the person who wrote the article does not mention any of that in his socialist utopia he describes.
Click to expand...

Who's going to pay for all those military bases in the South, SOL? Locals?
 
GordonGecko said:
trap, for "some reason" the GOP has a lock on Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee. Or are there lots of liberals in the rural areas and the cities are overrun with rightwingers in those states?
Click to expand...

Trap thinks that everyone who lives in a rural area, regardless of what state they are in, is a rifle-totin' varmint hunter, just like Sarah Palin.
 
Sickofleft said:
It's pathetic. Besides if the South does go who is going to bail California, Illnois, NY (to name just a few) out when they go belly up? Hard to do without Texas for example........funny the person who wrote the article does not mention any of that in his socialist utopia he describes.
Click to expand...

If the United States were to split into the blue states and the red states, the blue states like California, Illinois, and New York, would no longer have to subsidize those red states that collect far more from the federal government than they send in.

Why would it be "hard to do without Texas"???
 
GordonGecko said:
trap, for "some reason" the GOP has a lock on Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee. Or are there lots of liberals in the rural areas and the cities are overrun with rightwingers in those states?
Click to expand...

Yes, but you left out Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma, all of which are either already "red" or trending red, and most of which have no connection to "the South."
 
LeRoy_Was_Here said:
If the United States were to split into the blue states and the red states, the blue states like California, Illinois, and New York, would no longer have to subsidize those red states that collect far more from the federal government than they send in.

Why would it be "hard to do without Texas"???
Click to expand...

Well, for one thing, Texas and Alaska (both are "red" states) produce most of the nation's indigenous petroleum. The blue states might subsidize the red states, but most of it is highway money and the blue states would starve without the red state agribusiness. The reason our nation is one whole nation is that the "red" and "blue" states are better together than they would be apart.
 
i think its a bit of a stretch to deliberately create an opt-out process for obamacare, then complain when someone actually uses it.

this isn't just a "red state" phenomenon - every poll on Obamacare, since the moment of its midnight passage - shows that a majority of americans oppose it.

yet nobody is suggesting that "blue states" should be kicked out of the union.

we just want our congresspersons to legislate honestly, and read what the vote on. not take a vote at midnight on a sunday on 2,000 pages of minutiae they've never read.

55%+ americans oppose obamacare, and 98% haven't read it. probably 98% of congress too.

that's all you need to know, mary anne.
 
trapdoor said:
Well, for one thing, Texas and Alaska (both are "red" states) produce most of the nation's indigenous petroleum. The blue states might subsidize the red states, but most of it is highway money and the blue states would starve without the red state agribusiness. The reason our nation is one whole nation is that the "red" and "blue" states are better together than they would be apart.
Click to expand...

We've had this conversation before. There are plenty of blue states that have enormous agricultural production: California, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, just for starters. It is nothing less than ABSURD to suppose the blue states would 'starve' without the red states.
 
Who pays for all the military bases the US has all over the rest of the world now? So, likely the Government would still decide to keep much of them operational. After all - how or where will they aquire the new land in the more congested areas of the north east to relocate them?

connie
 
trapdoor said:
Yes, but you left out Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma, all of which are either already "red" or trending red, and most of which have no connection to "the South."
Click to expand...

Fine..."New Dixie" and "Prairie Union"....but consistantly the GOP has won the South since the Nixon/Reagan "Southern Strategy".
 
connieb said:
Who pays for all the military bases the US has all over the rest of the world now? So, likely the Government would still decide to keep much of them operational. After all - how or where will they aquire the new land in the more congested areas of the north east to relocate them?

connie
Click to expand...

Uh, connie...the US Government keeping a military base in a seceded South?

Is how Fort Sumter happened.
 
LeRoy_Was_Here said:
We've had this conversation before. There are plenty of blue states that have enormous agricultural production: California, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, just for starters. It is nothing less than ABSURD to suppose the blue states would 'starve' without the red states.
Click to expand...

Ohio is an agricultural state .Chinese are now filling the empty cars with Soy Beans shipping them back to China.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top