Posted on 10/02/2021 2:19:06 AM PDT by knighthawk
Many breathed a sigh of relief when President Biden was elected, not for policy but for a reunification of the country after four years of tumult and fiery division under President Trump. But eight months into the new presidency, America's deep disunity might not be letting up.
A new poll has revealed that political divisions run so deep in the US that over half of Trump voters want red states to secede from the union, and 41% of Biden voters want blue states to split off.
According to the analysis from the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, 52% of Trump voters at least somewhat agree with the statement: 'The situation is such that I would favor [Blue/Red] states seceding from the union to form their own separate country.' Twenty-five percent of Trump voters strongly agree.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Good idea.
But the cowards in the GOP, who always go along to get along, will never attempt to strengthen states' rights. Why, that would make them like antebellum Southerners!
I'm in that number favoring secession. Otherwise we all go blue, or head that way and be conquered by China, without a shot fired.
May be true ... but it won’t be easy. Read Schlicter’s recent series of novels (if you haven’t already) ... as events continue to unfold they are as much prognostications or handbooks as novels
Yes, it won't be painless. They will have their cartels and they'll be sending invaders our way for a hundred years or more. The entire Third World, plus China, will be on their side.
Few conservatives want to admit how bad it is, because actual hot war is the only path and winning it is the only good outcome. Who's up for a hot civil war? Almost nobody.
Yes we are. I've seen up close the malevolence and hatred that exudes from the left. They literally consider anything they have to do to win as acceptable. I don't know where all the old style blue collar dems went, but that's not what I encounter anymore. There is no amount of reason or facts that will ever change them and I believe it's because their souls are so black they have to attribute that same darkness to anything we say or do. It's a no win situation. They will never be satisfied with anything but utter destruction of this country and anyone who opposes them.
We need to collapse and throw off the federal government.
Tax revolt.
41%
That number again it always shows up when stupid ideas are purposed.
I knew we could count on you and like an impudent child try to start a mudslinging contest. I hardly mentioned Lincoln. The conversation wasn't really about that - as you know.
As well as toss out a few of your odd-ball ideas.
Ideas that are so "odd-ball" that almost half of Americans seem to agree given current opinion polls on the subject.
The U.S. and Canada didn't fight a protracted and bloody rebellion before separating. And as far as I know there are no Canadian equivalent of Lost Causers keeping acrimony alive. Had the South won their rebellion there is no reason to believe there wouldn't have been additional conflicts between the two. Hard feelings would have continue for God knows how long. Perhaps till today.
There was no "rebellion". I never mentioned any "lost cause" as you PC Revisionists like to call it. Hell, I didn't even mention PC Revisionists. We are talking about the present. As for your claims that just because there was a war of Independence that means the two sides would have continued to be at loggerheads, I would point out the history of Britian (and Canada) vis a vis the US does not bear out this claim. The two sides would have had plenty of reasons to cooperate and have productive relations.
Except, they didn't. If anybody thought even the original 7 seceding states' primary concern was the preservation of slavery, Lincoln and the Northern dominated Congress passed (with the necessary 2/3rds supermajority) the Corwin Amendment which would have enshrined slavery expressly in the constitution and made if effectively irrevocable. The original 7 seceding states turned down the offer of slavery forever in exchange for returning. The Upper South did not even choose to secede until Lincoln chose to start a war to impose federal government rule over people who no longer consented to it. Please do not try to revise history to argue otherwise.
Good. Then all the illegal aliens will move to the Blue States to get all the free stuff they deserve.
All of the articles of secession mention slavery as a reason for seceding.
So what are you saying, that it would have been all right for the confederacy to hold on to the slaves until they were ready to free them?
And if they were planning abolish slavery, the why do the articles of secession from all of the states mention slavery as a reason for seceding?
If slavery when the government mandates vaccines?
It looks like slavery is making a comeback.
It needs to be done by county and by citizen and by lead projectile.
Sure there was. It's in all the history books.
I never mentioned any "lost cause" as you PC Revisionists like to call it.
Mention or not, it's what you're embracing.
As for your claims that just because there was a war of Independence that means the two sides would have continued to be at loggerheads, I would point out the history of Britian (and Canada) vis a vis the US does not bear out this claim.
It took 134 years for the U.S. and the UK to unite in time of war. And in the interim there were several occasions where the two sides almost came to war again.
The two sides would have had plenty of reasons to cooperate and have productive relations.
And just as many reasons, if not more, for conflict.
I would say the same of the free trade deals with communist China, given that we're once again using slave labor to get our products cheap. How are we any better?
My point is that while Americans love to virtue signal about how we fought a war to end slavery, we are well on the way to getting it back...
All true. Every state is divided between right and left, and most people may not fall into either camp or don't care about politics at all.
Also, secession assumes that change stops when the country breaks up and each half puts itself under the control of right or left. But change is constant.
Fifty years ago, conservatives were complaining about East Coast liberals. We still are, but there's a lot of complaining about the people South Carolina or Utah or Arizona -- states once thought to be securely conservative -- send to Congress.
The conflicts we're dealing with involve trends going on over the whole Western or developed or free world. Every country has its corporate class and its political Establishment and that would be true of a seceded "red state America" too.
Meanwhile, if progressives keep going as they have, sooner or later, even the blue states will get sick of them. Politics are Fantasyland and someday the bubble will pop. Urbanites probably won't vote Republican, but they will back away from the ledge.
Plus, people aren't going to love having to go through check points to get to work or go shopping or visit relatives, or having to build twice the factories and facilities to produce half the output. I think the country will come to its senses somehow before we get a donut-hole or a Swiss cheese America. China overtaking the US may finally wake us up.
No there wasn't. And as usual, you just came here to start a pissing contest - not because you had anything to say on the topic at hand.
Mention or not, it's what you're embracing.
No, we're talking about the present day US and whether or not secession would be preferable to a bloodbath and/or how secession might be done. But as usual, you are utterly obsessed with one topic and desperate to have a pissing contest....which is why you always start them.
It took 134 years for the U.S. and the UK to unite in time of war. And in the interim there were several occasions where the two sides almost came to war again.
Uniting in time of war was not required to have good productive trade relations.
And just as many reasons, if not more, for conflict.
No they wouldn't. Each side would have had plenty of territory, natural resources, access to the sea, etc. There would have been no need for ongoing conflict just as there was no need for it between Canada and the US.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.