America thinks the unthinkable: More than half of Trump voters and 41% of Biden supporters want red and blue states to SECEDE from one another and form two new countries, shock new poll finds

UK Daily Mail ^ | October 1 2021 | MORGAN PHILLIPS

[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.

[FLT-bird]

Just look at how the Lincoln appointees voted in Texas V White.

I’ve got it! We’ll just use force to pack the court. Then when the court rules the way we want, we can say “see??? It was all good and constitutional-like. The court said so.”

[BroJoeK]

Worth noting, briefly, that FLT-bird's post #548 to TwelveOfTwenty is over 5,200 words and would take 12 pages to print-out -- no, I didn't print it, just checked it out... ;-)

That is 5,200+ words from FLT-bird who is **NOT** "obsessed" and does **NOT** have "my time you will get to steal," and is **NOT** "...spamming these threads endlessly with same tired old BS."

Thank goodness FLT-bird is preserving his own mental health by refusing to "engage with his intellectually dishonest obsessive BS."

And is **NOT** just posting "More sad pathetic obsession, BS and lies."

Thank goodness, for FLT-bird's 5,200+ word post is **NOT** "...really an indictment of how sad and empty [his] life is.
Can you imagine having so many empty hours to fill every day that you would seek others out in order to obsessively spew the same lies and BS over and over and over again just hoping they would throw you a bone by wasting their time to respond to your drivel?
You have to feel sorry for him."

So we can be 100% certain that nobody, but nobody, feels sorry for FLT-bird and his 5,200+ word posts.

[jmacusa]

With apologies to The Bard Of Avon; “Me thinks FLT doth go on too much’’.

[FLT-bird]

Nevermind that there are a bunch of quotes in that post. Also pay no attention to the fact that it is BroJoeK who ALWAYS seeks me out and never the reverse. Just remember, he is not obsessed. No sirree! Not one bit! LOL

[TwelveOfTwenty]

Did it have to pass and become a constitutional amendment in order to have been offered? Yes or no.

Well you asked, so...

Yes. Lincoln might just as well have offered the British Empire. Neither was his to give.

The effort to get it passed lost a lot of steam once the original 7 seceding states said they were not interested.

It never came close to ratification even before it "lost steam".

Everybody including Southern Democrats voted for its passage in 1865.

Not true.

There were more such statements by others. On another point, I have never argued that slavery was not AN issue.

You not only never made that point, you strongly denounced it in words that left me with no doubts about your sincerity about that.

It was pretty much understood by everybody that the 13th amendment had to pass. As such, Southerners were willing to pass it since they all had to live in one country after the war so it was time to concede the point - which they did in good faith.

Only Virginia and West Virginia were represented. Their reps, none of whom were Democrats, voted yes.

Before the war and even a couple years into the war, there weren't many abolitionists. They could not win elections

According to the declarations of secession, they did.

"The motive of those who protested against the extension of slavery had always really been concern for the welfare of the white man, and not an unnatural sympathy for the negro." William Seward.

He was an abolitionist, and it was no secret many abolitionists were frustrated with how slow things were moving. Frederick Douglas also expressed frustration early on.

However, the former slaves who escaped into the North and were accepted into the Army and Navy proves that wasn't all of them.

[FLT-bird]

Yes. Lincoln might just as well have offered the British Empire. Neither was his to give.

No it did not. It passed Congress. The prospect of it passing enough states was VERY real had the original 7 seceding states agreed to it. With the Republicans putting maximum pressure on the Northern states to pass it, they'd have gotten enough of them. They got a few even after the original 7 seceding states rejected it.

It never came close to ratification even before it "lost steam".

Au Contraire. Getting the necessary supermajority in each house of Congress and the signature of the president shows it was a genuine and very viable offer.

Not true.

The Southern states voted for its passage in 1865.

You not only never made that point, you strongly denounced it in words that left me with no doubts about your sincerity about that.

Again, false, It was AN issue. It was not THE issue. It was not even the main issue. It was what we all now would call a wedge issue.....something one side brings up to divide the sides neatly into the camps it wants and which serves to prevent any who are otherwise less committed from drifting over into the other camp.

Only Virginia and West Virginia were represented. Their reps, none of whom were Democrats, voted yes.

Louisiana ratified in February 17th. Tennessee April 7th. Arkansas April 14th. South Carolina November 13th. Alabama Dec 2nd. North Carolina Dec 4th Georgia Dec 6th. Georgia's ratification meant it passed. Florida and Texas (along with Oregon, California, Iowa, Kentucky, Delaware and New Jersey ratified it after its passage). The only Southern state which did not ratify it was Mississippi. The people who ratified it in the Southern states were the duly elected DEMOCRAT office holders. This was before the Occupation started. You are wrong once again.

According to the declarations of secession, they did.

According to the results of actual elections in the Northern states they did not.

He was an abolitionist, and it was no secret many abolitionists were frustrated with how slow things were moving. Frederick Douglas also expressed frustration early on.

That's not a complaint about slowness. He is accurately observing why the Republicans did not want slavery in the territories. They wanted to reserve it for White people. You know what else they did not want in the Territories? Black people. Yes, free ones too. Read Oregon's original Constitution. Read Kansas'.

However, the former slaves who escaped into the North and were accepted into the Army and Navy proves that wasn't all of them.,/p>

Both sides made liberal use of anybody they could to fight the war.

[DiogenesLamp]

Just look at how the Lincoln appointees voted in Texas V White. I’ve got it! We’ll just use force to pack the court. Then when the court rules the way we want, we can say “see??? It was all good and constitutional-like. The court said so.”

Exactly how they passed the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments. In my opinion, and a known principle in law for centuries, is coercion or duress renders any legal agreement invalid.

According to Law Professor Glenn Reynolds of "Instapundit", this forced ratification of those amendments is much discussed in academic legal circles.

[DiogenesLamp]

The Prize Cases was an 1862 decision.

The larger point of my previous rebuttal is that the legal system wasn't operating under actual law, but under political compulsion. This was of course the case after April of 1861 and continued for long after the war was over.

I also wish to once again remind you that I never accept an answer that uses the reason "Because the courts say so."

My long learned history of court decisions has convinced me that the courts are often full of idiots and/or political bias, and often express opinions that have nothing to do with actual law.

Anyone basing their argument on a court opinion usually does so because they cannot justify it with common sense and reason.

[FLT-bird]

The 13th I would argue was legitimately passed. It was ratified by the actual elected politicians in the Southern states. Everybody accepted the end of slavery as the outcome of the war.

It was then that the radical Republicans in Congress passed the 14th amendment to usurp all kinds of power for the federal government at the states' expense AND to say that Democratically elected politicians in the Southern states could not hold office. The Southern states rejected this and it did not pass.

Then the Radical Republicans went full totalitarian starting the Occupation of the Southern states by military force and disqualifying those elected Southern politicians and disenfranchising practically all the voters in the Southern states based on the argument that the Southern states were "out" of the union so they could do this. Of course, their entire rationale for starting the war is that the Southern states could never leave and were therefore still "in" the union......but if they were "in"....show me the provision of the constitution that allows the federal government to disqualify office holders and disenfranchise voters? There isn't one of course. One of the conditions imposed on the Occupied Southern states was that they had to ratify the 14th and 15th amendments to get back "in" to a union they never supposedly left. All of this was blatantly unconstitutional. The 14th and 15th amendments never legally passed.

and lest anyone think this analysis mine, just go back and look at the legal scholarship on this. There is a long history of recognizing this was all unconstitutional and that these two ammendments are therefore illegitimate.

PS.....though they claimed the Southern states were "out" when they rejected the 14th amendment, they recognized them as still being "in" and those elected politicians in those states as being perfectly legitimate office holders when it came to recognizing their passage of the 13th amendment. They only magically became illegitimate the second they did something the Radical Republicans disagreed with.

[TwelveOfTwenty]

Again, false, It was AN issue. It was not THE issue. It was not even the main issue. It was what we all now would call a wedge issue.....something one side brings up to divide the sides neatly into the camps it wants and which serves to prevent any who are otherwise less committed from drifting over into the other camp.

I think you misunderstood me. I acknowledged you never made the point that slavery wasn't an issue, and I went so far as to say your strongly worded denunciation of it was genuine.

Can't I even agree with you without having you tell me I'm wrong?!? ;)

[FLT-bird]

I think you misunderstood me. I acknowledged you never made the point that slavery wasn't an issue, and I went so far as to say your strongly worded denunciation of it was genuine. Can't I even agree with you without having you tell me I'm wrong?!? ;)

Mea Culpa.

[BroJoeK]

TwelveOfTwenty to FLT-bird: "Can't I even agree with you without having you tell me I'm wrong?!? ;)"

Again we should notice that FLT-bird has dominated, bullied & obsessed over this thread like nothing I've seen from (presumably) him in years.
Yes, he's done it before, but not so much lately.

Years ago FLT-bird was good at posting "cut & paste" quotes and at insulting & bullying anyone who disagreed, but he had a serious problem with html formatting.
Now he's figured out enough html to make his posts at least readable, and if anything he's added to his old list of "cut & paste" quotes.
And on this thread, at least, he's sought to dominate (obsessively) just like the "old days".

1. 108 FLT-bird posts so far, of 570 thread-total.
2. Of his 108 posts, 18 ran over 1,000 words.
3. And four of those ran over 3,000 words, the most being post #548 at 5,276 words.
4. FLT-bird's total word count is over 53,000 for this thread.

And all of that from somebody eager to accuse opponents of being "obsessed".

Hats off to TwelveOfTwenty for taking endless abuse & nonsense from FLT-bird, responding with grace, humor, honesty, facts & reason.

[jmacusa]

FLT needs a girl friend.

[wardaddy]

Wipe your chin Joe

[FLT-bird]

Oh look! Its the obsessed one back yet again to accuse others of “dominating” and “bullying” for having the temerity to....gasp!...answer when somebody tags them.

The obsessed one counts others posts and even the words in their posts.....then accuses others of being obsessed.

You couldn’t make up something this funny if you tried.

[DiogenesLamp]

I don't believe the 13th was legitimately passed because these states were under occupation at the time and it was well known at the time that this amendment was the will of Washington DC.

Having an army impose their will on the populace does not make a vote legitimate. It is duress.

Would these states have voted for this amendment in the absence of occupation armies? Some say they fought the entire bloody war just to prevent the overthrow of slavery, and if people think this is true, what sense does it make that they would simply vote it away?

No, this vote did not represent the actual will of the people of those states, it represented an effort to mollify the invading force so that perhaps they would refrain from imposing harsher conditions on the people.

And yes, all that other stuff about them being "out" when they needed a legal argument to justify their abuse, and "in" when they needed a legal argument to justify what they needed for ratification is just bullsh*t.

It is Kabuki theater to create the appearance of a legal veneer for what Washington DC did. They still pull this stuff today, like the holding of those political prisoners in Washington DC. Kabuki theater. Pretense of legal process.

[BroJoeK]

FLT-bird: "Oh look! Its the obsessed one back yet again to accuse others of “dominating” and “bullying” for having the temerity to....gasp!...answer when somebody tags them."

LOL -- you were **NOT** tagged for your first four posts -- #40, #41, #42 & #46.
Finally DoodleDawg (#48) and TwelveOfTwenty (#54) responded and you immediately started in with insults & bullying them.

I was brought in by DiogenesLamp (#127), my first post was #181, by which point you, FLT-bird, had already made 26 posts, and your first response to me (#205) began with the words, "As usual BroJoeK obsesses over this topic."

After some exchanges, FLT-bird's #261 began with, "and with that, that is the last of my time you will get to steal.
I'm not going to bother with any more of your PC Revisionist lies and BS no matter how desperately you try to steal more of my time by spamming this thread endlessly with your drivel."

That was FLT-bird's 38th post, and you went on to make over 70 more, 108+ total, over 53,000 words, many repeating the same points over & over & over.
Therefore, it's entirely fair to say: if you look up the word "FLT-bird" the definition is "Obsessed, insulting, bullying, coward."

In other words: a typical Lost Cause Democrat.

[FLT-bird]

You’ve got to love it when the same guy who habitually looks for these threads then who jumps in and tags me when I haven’t addressed him, then counts the number of posts I’ve had and even the number of words in some posts then turns around and claims I’m the one who’s obsessed.

This is what shrinks call “projection”.

[BroJoeK]

wardaddy: "Wipe your chin Joe"

Sonny boy, you've got milk on your upper lip.
Here, child, let me wipe it off for you.

[BroJoeK]

Your posts here reveal you as an obsessed, insulting, bullying, coward.

No projections necessary, anybody can see & verify it.
I merely took the time to quantify just how much you are.

Sorry if the truth hurts (**NOT**).