If possible, should we peacefully split the country?

To split or not to split...that is the question...


  • Total voters
    67
  • Poll closed .
Uh oh, you calling out the Republican voters who have had enough of the establishment bullcrappers, and want to separate from the bullcrap somehow ???

We are losing this country. We see it every year. If we do nothing, we will surrender it to Socialism/ Communism. I would hate to separate, but I'd rather lose half the country instead of losing the entire thing. Too many men and women have died for it.
 
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 [sic] peacefully?
...

How about NO?
Your reasoning ?

The UNITED States of America is much stronger than the limp-dick defeatist pussies who keep crying about the sky falling. MY great nation will still be here long, long after all these spineless quitters are less than dust.
Uh oh, you calling out the Republican voters who have had enough of the establishment bullcrappers, and want to separate from the bullcrap somehow ???

I don't give a shit who you are or what party you claim to belong to. If you are a dickless quitter you might as well get the fuck out, because we don't need losers like you in MY country.
That kind of sounds like something our ancestors would have been hearing back in 1775.
 
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...


I don't think a link is required for an open poll question.

Therefore I'm not gonna read it. :eusa_snooty:

Splitting is absurd. No way in the world. Why would we do that??

I'll tell ya what we SHOULD do to address the bipolar tension.
Eliminate the fucking Electoral College.

Just think --- a world where cockamamie ideas like "red state" and "blue state" ---- do not exist.
That would be great, but getting rid of the electoral college won't stop the pols from ferreting out which states have the most Dems, etc. I agree we should get rid of it, now that every state awards its electors according to the popular vote. The concept of that being overridden just got tested and was rejected in a big way. It's an additional anachronistic step whose time is long gone.
 
Wouldn't be a even split. There is just no way to split this in any meaningful fashion.


Image result for voters by party map

The Blue areas are where the $$$$ is
Controlled by those who aren't leftisfs
 
The Constitution establishes the country.
So if you uphold the COTUS, you uphold the US. It's what defines the US.

I disagree. The country is separate from the Constitution.

The country can...and I believe the case can be made for 'has'... easily diverge from the constraints of the Constitution.

If the country ignores the Constitution, which do you support?

I don't accept your separate reality as a premise.

If you remove the Constitution --- you don't have a country. If you don't have a country, then you also don't have a Constitution for it. Can't have the one without the other unless you're running a military dick-tatorship or a kingdom.
Does the UK have a constitution? Germany?
 
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...


I don't think a link is required for an open poll question.

Therefore I'm not gonna read it. :eusa_snooty:

Splitting is absurd. No way in the world. Why would we do that??

I'll tell ya what we SHOULD do to address the bipolar tension.
Eliminate the fucking Electoral College.

Just think --- a world where cockamamie ideas like "red state" and "blue state" ---- do not exist.
That would be great, but getting rid of the electoral college won't stop the pols from ferreting out which states have the most Dems, etc. I agree we should get rid of it, now that every state awards its electors according to the popular vote. The concept of that being overridden just got tested and was rejected in a big way. It's an additional anachronistic step whose time is long gone.

It ain't the only thing we can do, far from it. But dividing the country up into this mindless fake-dichotomy of "red" and "blue" states can only be divisive because it's the only thing it can be. James Madison himself wanted to ban the WTA practice, he could see where it was going even in his own time when it was just getting started.
 
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...
How about working to lessen the divisions? Are the people from MO quitters?

We have no desire to work with communist.

Or, apparently, to learn how English plurals work. :banghead:
 
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...
How about working to lessen the divisions? Are the people from MO quitters?

We have no desire to work with communist.

Or, apparently, to learn how English plurals work. :banghead:

Tell me the problem you have with my post or stfu.
 
The Constitution establishes the country.
So if you uphold the COTUS, you uphold the US. It's what defines the US.

I disagree. The country is separate from the Constitution.

The country can...and I believe the case can be made for 'has'... easily diverge from the constraints of the Constitution.

If the country ignores the Constitution, which do you support?

I don't accept your separate reality as a premise.

If you remove the Constitution --- you don't have a country. If you don't have a country, then you also don't have a Constitution for it. Can't have the one without the other unless you're running a military dick-tatorship or a kingdom.
Does the UK have a constitution? Germany?
 
Sure.

All the rubes can go to Alabama and Mississippi and start their own country.

Oh, and take West Virginia with you.
 
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...
How about working to lessen the divisions? Are the people from MO quitters?

We have no desire to work with communist.

Or, apparently, to learn how English plurals work. :banghead:

Tell me the problem you have with my post or stfu.

Do you have in fact any clue in the world how we form a plural in English on a noun like, say, "communist"?
 
Will the rest of Conservistan really give a shit?
And would it matter anyway, if they did? Remember, these are generally the "taker" States. The day they recede, they have no federal funds.... No armies, no federal agencies, and a crappy economy with low wages and no federal negotiating power in the global market. It will be...a "shithole" country.
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?

Thats very telling
 
I don't give a shit who you are or what party you claim to belong to. If you are a dickless quitter you might as well get the fuck out, because we don't need losers like you in MY country.
I like you man...but you're not making a very good point here...unless this is just an emotional response.

I'm very sure that a good and loyal Englishman made this same comment in Massachusetts in 1770.

And I respect that...loyalty is a virtue.

But, when King George demands more than a man can abide...the argument "God save the King" loses its appeal.

Sometimes you have to realize the deck is stacked against you and the only way to win is to stop playing.

False equivalency. Very false equivalency. Perhaps some study of colonial American history might clear a few things up.
 
For anyone wondering how Germany during Hitler got there, or how Venezuela got so fucked up. Or Cuba, Russia, China etc.

They got that bad because people just give up. They wouldn’t separate from the state and hoped for the best. They didn’t want violence or a war so they just surrendered.

That’s where the US is today. We either fight for freedom and turning back 100 years of left wing progressive policies, or we surrender for some mysterious unity they promise if you just don’t fight it.
 
I'll tell ya what we SHOULD do to address the bipolar tension.
Eliminate the fucking Electoral College.

Just think --- a world where cockamamie ideas like "red state" and "blue state" ---- do not exist.
That would require a Constitutional Amendment, although I'm aware of the interstate compact thing that some states have agreed to regarding the popular vote.

If the presidency ever went to a simple popular vote, however, there would be no need to campaign in the vast majority of the country. You could just campaign in about 10 metro areas and nothing else.

That would disenfranchise far more people than the EC does.
 

Forum List

Back
Top