It may be time for Americans to consider splitting up the UNITED States of America

In My Humble Opinion
121

Oh for crying out loud… reactionary much? This is borderline hysteria. Everybody was convinced the Republican Party was dead four years ago. And now, Democrats will NEVER be in power again?? That is ridiculous, but I do think business as usual in the democratic party will not work. Do you think business as usual is a sound political strategy? Times change. Adapt, or die. A lot of democrats who voted for Obama voted for Trump this time around. They are not racists, hate abortion, gay marriage, etc. they just didn’t want more of the same. And Hillary Clinton represented more of the same. More of the same was NOT going to fly with blue collar whites. Not this time. Things are NOT as great for working class whites as they once were. That is an indisputable fact. You can blame them for that, but it would not be wise to do so if you want to win an election. It didn’t help that she virtually ignored the rust belt, thinking they were in the bag.

If she hadn’t stole the nomination it would have been Sanders vs Trump and possibly could have resulted in a different outcome, because at least he wouldn’t have represented more of the same. Democrats used to be the champions of the working class whites. They need to become so again. They can do that, and they can do that without sacrificing their principles too. One big difference in 2020 is they aren’t going to nominate Hillary Clinton. That single factor alone will help.

122

That’s just cognitive dissonance. It too will pass.

123

I’m not entirely sure what or who you’re answering here with throwing your own anti-Hillary hysteria into the mix. We were not discussing her at all.

124

Pretty accurate. The Democrats badly miscalculated who to run for President by putting their thumb on the scale and choosing a candidate that caused visceral revulsion in much of the electorate. She ran a terrible campaign, devoted more time to raising money and less time to campaigning than Trump did, who ran circles around her. She didn’t advance any policy goals or anything she would do different from Obama, and whether you like his message or not, Trump did. The messages that did leak from the Clinton campaign were grossly condescending to the working class in America of every race. Add in her Clintonworld paranoia that led her to set up a home-brewed server system in her bathroom to avoid the transparency laws, the FBI investigation of her (in which Trump obviously had no part), an over-reliance on polls in a campaign where the media attacks on Trump made it unlikely the polled would be honest with pollsters and a flawed and overskewed polling model by most pollsters, the apparent pay-for-play corruption of the Clinton Foundation, a physical collapse on the 9/11 anniversary that could have been explained honestly and easily as flu symptoms but was completely mishandled by her courtiers, due to (again) Clintonworld paranoia, the appearance of an extralegal approach by the husband of the subject of an FBI investigation to the AG on the tarmac at Sky Harbor Airport (you should blame ABC-15 news in Phoenix for good journalism more than any Russian involvement), an appearance of devoting more time to celebrity fundraisers than talking to the working class…is it any wonder she lost?

That may not happen again. The pendulum swung one way, eventually it will swing back again. Just wait it out, learn your lessons, and try to do better next time. Trump could fail spectacularly and lose re-election, or the economy and stock market could continue to skyrocket, the tax bill could invigorate the economy and job growth, and he could handle one of the major crises that come along very well, improving his position with the Middle. No one knows.

125

I think he was answering the OP’s original post, which claimed that the Democrats were done and the Republicans now had a stranglehold on power, so the only solution was to dissolve the Union.

126

Correct.

127

By dragging in anti-Hillary hysteria while claiming others are hysterical.

Hysterical.

128

Obviously California (or any other state) isn’t even remotely likely to secede for myriad rather obvious reasons, and a confederate-style succession attempt would be summarily rejected by the federal government out of hand, and be more firmly ended via police/military action about forty minutes after the supposed new government did anything the federal government considered illegal.

That said, I’m not sure that succession is actually impossible - it just can’t be done unilaterally. It’s my vague and not-a-constitutional-lawyer understanding that if a state really, really, really wants to leave then they can totally do so, via methods comparable to getting inducted in the first place - that, is, majority approval of the action in congress.

Which is to say, it has a lot less to do with California (or Texas, or whichever) wanting to leave, and a lot more to do with all the other states wanting them gone. And yeah, this is obviously a “not gonna happen” scenario, but that’s different from an impossible one - legally speaking, I mean.

Presuming a situation where California really did manage to piss off the rest of congress that much, then it seems to me the military bases and other federal assets in the area are the largest impediment to California being shown the door. It’s possible to imagine a case where the US was willing to lose California’s agriculture, ports, and disneyland, but not one where it’s willing to hand over its assets and weapons. So that’s a huge, huge problem for even fantasy fiction scenarios of a warless secession.

That’s about the only such problem I see, though - yes, there are scores of reasons why California wouldn’t work well as a standalone country (particularly one with a hostile relationship with the US), but all such problems would kick in after the break occurred and could theoretically be ignored if California and the remaining states were that desperate to see each other gone.

And yes, I include the presence of conservative areas within the country among the list of ignorable factors. Citizens (both red and blue) who violently oppose the secession would certainly be a problem for the government of the newly formed country, but that’s the sort of problem that nations all around the world have been dealing with forever. Court them or crush them, but either way they can be dealt with.

129

It’s certainly possible if enough people want to see progressives kicked out of the Union. Any attempt by the new government to harm citizens that refuse to switch allegiance to their new masters would trigger military action, though. That’s presuming you have enough people with the skills and desire to subdue the sort of people who would resist, and who would be heavily armed. That’s also very unlikely.

130

Excuse me? Point out a SINGLE thing I wrote about Hillary that is a hysterical premise. Elucidate.

They don’t even have to be on the level of hysteria as permanent Republican power, secession, or inevitable civil war, which have been bandied about this thread in abundance.

NOTHING I said hasn’t already been said publicly, by prominent democrats and liberal pundants and writers, since the election.

131

Well, this.

132

I know. But then the damned Electoral College chose Trump instead.

133

One of the main reasons that retirees are attracted to red states is because they have low state and local taxes, and often, a low cost of living.

Places that have military bases have those bases because the representatives of those areas fought to get them in there. They wanted the bases there, as that increases the economic viability of their districts.

I never really got this. I don’t know specifics on Bear’s Ears, but the vast majority of the land in the BLM inventory costs much more than it makes. The reason that this land is not turned over to the states is because the states don’t want it. They cannot afford to manage it. If the lands were turned over, then you would either be paying more to manage it, or the land would be managed more poorly. This is indeed, another benefit that low populated states get from the federal government.

What you list there are benefits that small states get at the expense of large states. They are not random either, they were desired by the elected representatives.

134

Don’t claim you would have won at checkers if we agreed before that the game we were playing was chess.

135

Donna Brazile, Elizabeth Warren, and many others disagree. Now, maybe they didn’t exactly use the word “stolen”, but they really didn’t have to.

136

No you didn’t. President Obama is your nazi-lover’s superior in all ways.

137

1> Bringing her into this discussion AT ALL. Hillary is gone. That bogeyman won’t be under your bed anymore, no matter how many times you look.
2> Pretty much everything else you said in that post.

138

Calling it nonsense doesn’t change the welfare-queenery of the red states.

139

Yeah, if you voted for Trump because Hillary stole the nomination from Bernie, then there’s nothing that can be done for you.

140

Blue states aren’t carving anything out of anything since the military and armed Americans are predominantly not blue.