A recent youtube video considers a scenario where the red states and blue states have split into completely separate countries and posits that Austin would be the new capital of the Red States of America which, frankly, is too ridiculous a suggestion to take seriously.
What would be an actual realistic candidate for the new Red States of America?
It doesn’t look, to me, as if you could have a viable single entity for the blue states…depending on which you are counting for that. More like 3-4 smaller nations of blue states. As for the red states, I’d definitely think it would be somewhere in Texas, as it will be the largest single economic entity in the red states new nation. Take your pick of large cities in the state…not sure why Austin wouldn’t work or is ‘too ridiculous’, seems reasonable to me.
Austin remains the capital of Texas, but there’s no particular reason to make it the capital of the Republican States of America. Dallas or Houston would make a good provisional capital while the dust settles. I expect Texas will insist the new national capital be within its borders and I can picture them creating a new District for it, possibly on the outskirts of San Antonio to try to tie in to all that Alamo crap.
I don’t think Austin is a stupid answer either. Just because the city itself has many liberal overtones, doesn’t mean that it won’t work. It is still the capital of Texas after all. Dallas would work too. As much as people love to hate on Texas, it is booming and a highly successful state with a relatively low cost of living. If other states would stop blindly criticizing it because of suppressed jealousy, they might learn something. If you can’t make it there, you can’t make it anywhere.
There are other choices as well but there is a word limit on posts. Many Southern cities are doing just great but red <> Southern. The vast majority of the U.S. by land area is red.
What is the “blue” capital going to be - Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore or Camden?
The “enclave” issue concerning cities like Atlanta and Austin presents a general problem.
Those places would want to secede from the secession and remain with the rest of the country. They would ask for military assistance of the military kind. Since they control key infrastructure for their regions, the “outside” folks are going to have a problem. OTOH, being surrounded by blue suburbs that often contain the airport the reverse will be true as well.
But … back to the OP. Maybe Birmingham. Not as blue as most other Southern cities. Centrally sited. Etc.
(And what about regionally mixed states like Florida? How would that be split up?)
This was my first thought … why would the Blue States of America want to keep using Washington DC? … alternately: Richmond, VA …
The Blue States of Eastern America could set up shop in Buffalo, NY … easy access to Canada when the glorious armies of RSA pour across the Mason-Dixon line … the Purplish Mauve States of Western and Southern North America could just keep using Mexico City …
Personally I think the makeup of the state legislatures, rather than who they voted for President, would be a better judge of which way a state would go in the great divide. Possibly with some states dividing if enough counties finding themselves on the wrong side like eastern California. As to the OP’s question I’d go with Topeka.
Canada has a no freeloaders policy for immigration so that’ll be a bust.
As to the OP, I’ll agree that it will probably wind up somewhere in Texas, but I doubt it would Austin as Austin is considered on of the more liberal cities in the state. Unless we’re also planning a citizen exchange to smooth over liberal and conservative enclaves.