If possible, should we peacefully split the country?

[Utilitarian]

I'm not affiliated with any bunch or party. And I'm actually not conservative on all policies. I just don't care for a lot of modern progressive social views.

Sure, Karen. Keep trying to convince us not to notice you are a Party of the Rumper and a John Birch Society bitch.

I take it you don't get along well with anyone that has different views from your own. If you simplify all relations down to "my team" and "fascists", then you miss the nuances of most people's perspectives.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Word on the street many PROG is "I don't know what to think".

Guess what that's code for?

 

[Utilitarian]

Actually, I prefer modern Poland. Modern Japan is actually nice as well. I'm not a fascist, although I realize how strong the urge is to label your opponents as such. It's a lot easier than making a counterargument.

Sort of like all the JBSers keep claiming that they are something else as well. I think it started in 1964 the first time you characters were thrown out of the Republican Party. We need to do it again. Looks like Goldwater was right.

Goldwater was a better candidate for president than most in the last century, but his libertarian leanings did not fare well against LBJ's warmongering rhetoric.

Sadly, there is no consistently anti-war party in America other than libertarians.

 

[jackflash]

Just what the title asks. If a house divided cannot stand, should the house divide into two or more houses that can stand while we can still seperate peacefully?

Since I believe I am required a link...here it is...

Is America Doomed to Split Apart?

townhall.com

No. The more logical approach would be to keep exposing the race baiter$, power & control enviro $hy$ters, corporate corruption, profe$$ional politician$, marxi$t$(Stati$t left), deep $tate etc. for what they are in all reality. It's more beneficial to cure the illness than kill the patient.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I'm not affiliated with any bunch or party. And I'm actually not conservative on all policies. I just don't care for a lot of modern progressive social views.

Sure, Karen. Keep trying to convince us not to notice you are a Party of the Rumper and a John Birch Society bitch.

I take it you don't get along well with anyone that has different views from your own. If you simplify all relations down to "my team" and "fascists", then you miss the nuances of most people's perspectives.

Take away the "Big Lie" and you don't have a perspective.

 

[Utilitarian]

I take it you don't get along well with anyone that has different views from your own. If you simplify all relations down to "my team" and "fascists", then you miss the nuances of most people's perspectives.

Take away the "Big Lie" and you don't have a perspective.

What do you see as the truth of the American system? Do you actually believe either party puts your interests ahead of lobbyists and corporations?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Disenfranchisement is hardly the only reason to jettison the EC, and I'm not sure it would disenfranchise more. As it stands now everybody in, say, California or Texas is disenfranchised before the vote even starts, and then once the vote is in, half or often more than half the rest of the voters go to the shredder as well.

One of its big flaws is that it suppresses voter turnout in general. Nobody in the aforementioned 'Red" or "Blue" state has any reason to vote at all, as that state's vote is predetermined. They can go vote with their state, vote against their state, vote for a third party, or stay home and bake cookies and every scenario returns exactly the same result with the exception that in the last one you get cookies.

That's a major reason our voter turnout is embarrassing. In 2016, a more typical year than the last round, turnout was 55%. That's absurd.

There's a simple solution for that though. Just make it so that all states distribute electoral votes by the popular vote of the respective state.

So, if 60% of Texans vote Republican and 40% vote Democrats, 60% of the votes in Texas would go to the GOP candidate and 40% would go to the Democratic candidate. Unfortunately, this is a reform that would have to be done state-by-state, but you might be able to get states to enter a compact on that. This would differ from the current compact I mentioned, because that one is related to the national popular vote. With a state-based popular vote system for electoral votes, the winner-takes-all effect that causes low turnout would be gone.

Is there anything about the Constitution you don’t want to fuck up?

 

[Utilitarian]

There's a simple solution for that though. Just make it so that all states distribute electoral votes by the popular vote of the respective state.

So, if 60% of Texans vote Republican and 40% vote Democrats, 60% of the votes in Texas would go to the GOP candidate and 40% would go to the Democratic candidate. Unfortunately, this is a reform that would have to be done state-by-state, but you might be able to get states to enter a compact on that. This would differ from the current compact I mentioned, because that one is related to the national popular vote. With a state-based popular vote system for electoral votes, the winner-takes-all effect that causes low turnout would be gone.

Is there anything about the Constitution you don’t want to fuck up?

How would removing winner takes all "fuck up" the Constitution? It would allow the EC to still serve its purpose without discouraging people of minority parties within a state from voting.

In short, the end result of most elections would be the same, but we'd have a higher voter turnout, which would at least give people a little more faith in the system.

It wouldn't improve my faith in the system much, but that's because the main issues with the system aren't related to the EC.

 

[candycorn]

I often hear this argument, but if that's true.... why wouldn't you support secession of red states? Wouldn't that benefit the blue states?

No. No it wouldn't. Why would you think that it would?

If the premise is that red states are a net loss financially, then giving them independence would reduce the public debt of the remaining blue states over time. It would also allow you to spend more of your own tax money on your states rather than the red ones.

From a public funding standpoint that may be the case.

From a private enterprise standpoint....uh no.

 

[candycorn]

No. No it wouldn't. Why would you think that it would?

How would it help us and not you? Wouldn't you be happy with a cradle-to-grave government, a government that has government healthcare, a government that prohibits citizens from owning guns, a government where all dope is legal but cigarettes not, a government with no police or a very weak police force, a government if you want to work, you can, and if you don't want to work, you don't have to, a government that taxes your job creators at 70%?

You see, I don't want any of these things, and that's why I've supported the idea of separate countries for the last couple of years now.

It wouldn't help anyone. Your imagination is funny.

 

[Utilitarian]

If the premise is that red states are a net loss financially, then giving them independence would reduce the public debt of the remaining blue states over time. It would also allow you to spend more of your own tax money on your states rather than the red ones.

From a public funding standpoint that may be the case.

From a private enterprise standpoint....uh no.

Elaborate. I'm not sure what you're getting at.

 

[two_iron]

Why in the wide world of fuck would the non-productive half of the country want to remain within the same borders as the productive half of the country? Other than the obvious reason.

We're not going to tolerate fake elections. That's a fact. It's bad enough we put up with fake news, fake social platforms, and now a fake president... let's get this shit over with. I'm game for any method of making this happen.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

I take it you don't get along well with anyone that has different views from your own. If you simplify all relations down to "my team" and "fascists", then you miss the nuances of most people's perspectives.

Take away the "Big Lie" and you don't have a perspective.

What do you see as the truth of the American system? Do you actually believe either party puts your interests ahead of lobbyists and corporations?

I see a party that is badly in need of rebuilding. Rather than buildit from the top, you rebuild it from the bottom. But first we need to get rid of the current guard. The good news is, they are eliminating themselves.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It wouldn't help anyone. Your imagination is funny.

It would help us on the right greatly. Imagine that. No more illegals to worry about. No more attacking our fuel supply. No more hidden or direct taxes. Much less government control which means more freedom for the citizens. No more handing out welfare to able minded and body people who don't want to work. More responsibility. More support of our police.

How could we not like a country ran like that?

 

[candycorn]

If the premise is that red states are a net loss financially, then giving them independence would reduce the public debt of the remaining blue states over time. It would also allow you to spend more of your own tax money on your states rather than the red ones.

From a public funding standpoint that may be the case.

From a private enterprise standpoint....uh no.

Elaborate. I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Okay, Arkansas is a red state. So (depending on how we split), Wal Mart will be located in Conserv-istan theoretically. I want to buy a widget from Wal*Mart. Wal Mart can sell it to me but because of the inevitable taxes on such transactions between nations that your blob imposed and the couter-tariffs imposed on Conserve-istan....the price that Wal*Mart can sell the widget at goes up. So I shop local. Wal*Mart loses the sale.

Ditto for thousands of different companies in both America and Conserv-istan.

 

[candycorn]

It wouldn't help anyone. Your imagination is funny.

It would help us on the right greatly. Imagine that. No more illegals to worry about. No more attacking our fuel supply. No more hidden or direct taxes. Much less government control which means more freedom for the citizens. No more handing out welfare to able minded and body people who don't want to work. More responsibility. More support of our police.

How could we not like a country ran like that?

So how would you guys handle Texas begging for assistance. Do you want to send aid down to a state you don't live in?

 

[Utilitarian]

What do you see as the truth of the American system? Do you actually believe either party puts your interests ahead of lobbyists and corporations?

I see a party that is badly in need of rebuilding. Rather than buildit from the top, you rebuild it from the bottom. But first we need to get rid of the current guard. The good news is, they are eliminating themselves.

I don't think it's a party thing. Trump was basically an anomaly. Most of the time, both the Democrats and Republicans support many of the same policies. They both bailout Wall Street. They both enter unnecessary wars. They both spend huge amounts more than the government receives.

It's an illusion of choice.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So how would you guys handle Texas begging for assistance. Do you want to send aid down to a state you don't live in?

If it needed it yes. The problem with our country as we have it is we give all our money to the federal government, and when states need help, that's who they turn to. Lower federal taxes and higher state taxes gives every state the ability to take care of most all of their problems.

 

[Utilitarian]

Okay, Arkansas is a red state. So (depending on how we split), Wal Mart will be located in Conserv-istan theoretically. I want to buy a widget from Wal*Mart. Wal Mart can sell it to me but because of the inevitable taxes on such transactions between nations that your blob imposed and the couter-tariffs imposed on Conserve-istan....the price that Wal*Mart can sell the widget at goes up. So I shop local. Wal*Mart loses the sale.

Ditto for thousands of different companies in both America and Conserv-istan.

Shopping local is what people should be doing. Walmart is a good example of where America started to go wrong. Their entire business model was based on killing local businesses through getting advantages from local governments that the small businesses couldn't get.

In short, America's version of capitalism was corrupted into a state capitalism that favors big business over small business.

 

[Shelzin]

So how would you guys handle Texas begging for assistance. Do you want to send aid down to a state you don't live in?

If "begging for assistance" didn't work... They wouldn't do it.