It's Time For The United States to Divorce Before Things Get Dangerous

The Federalist ^ | April 10, 2018 | Jesse Kelly

[rellimpank]

—neither would any of Nevada except Clark County—

[Boogieman]

Let ‘em have that swamp, then we don’t need to bother draining it.

Next time, we build the capitol on some high ground.

[Tuxedo]

It makes me wonder what the supper table conversations must have been like in 1860. Did the people know what was coming? Did they discuss it with their friends?

Now we can discuss it openly and watch it live on TV as it slowly goes from the Cold Civil War to the all out total war.

I don’t see us making a West America, America, and East America. It won’t work. Too many libs will be trapped in the big cities like Dallas, Chicago, Houston, Austin, Cleveland, etc. Maybe they move, but I doubt it. They will still dissent and riot. No, I agree - a hot war is what will happen. But with no land seizures. War in the streets, like you see overseas. The economy will collapse and all will suffer. A mess. It could take decades to resolve if it ever does. I think that is what some of these leftists actually want. The complete destruction of the USA. They will start it and we may eventually finish it. It’s such a chilling prospect when you really analyze it.

Has the fuse already been lit?

[XRdsRev]

Why should we give up one square inch of the land our ancestors toiled, sacrificed and died for ?

[FreeReign]

The authors map is lame.

Here, try dividing the country this way.

[Gumdrop]

Thanks for the reminder that Chicago does not represent all other folks from Illinois any more than the Mpls-St. Paul voters represent outstate Minnesotans. I know that others in the USA face the same problem - like rural Californians, Oregonians, Washingtonians and even New Yorkers.

[DNME]

We don’t need a line drawn down the middle, nor several lines to create different districts.

We are the United States. We are 50 separate entities, each with its own Constitution and republican form of government. We are United only because we agreed to be.

What if we disagree to be? Let the U.S. revert to 50 independent nations and let each decide which side of the madness line they prefer to occupy.

I’ll likely need to sell my house in Massachusetts, which would probably (but not definitely!) join the bat-shit brigade, while my New Hampshire neighbors may find the backbone to throw out all those invading Massholes who have made the Granite State such a purple mess. (New Hampshire driving skills are now awful, which reveals the effect of the invasion.)

We would need to announce the dis-Union then wait for the dust to settle, before any real estate decisions, but I would hate to have move five states away just to find peace.

[aquila48]

Bookmark

[matt1234]

As much as I would like to wave a magic wand and get rid of The Leftist, I’m not willing to concede one inch of ground to them.

Agreed. The hyper-vocal left does not represent half of Americans. It represents maybe 20%. Give them nothing.

[Jack Black]

Well New Yorkers moving to New Hampshire aren't really invading. Under the current rules anyone in the USA can move or travel anywhere at any time.

After a break up the Red States of America would build a secure border and no one from the Blue States could enter without extreme vetting. Perhaps if they were allowed to immigrate they would never get voting rights if they have every registered as a Democrat in their home state...