Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Total distortion on your part. All this indicates is "political" preferences for two candidates in a single election. Your map is a snapshot political one that is basically meaningless. The best you do is acknowledge that rural areas tend to "vote" differently from urban areas. Big surprise.
If you did a similar "political" vote map of Czechoslovakia before they voluntarily and peaceably split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia, you would see a similar pattern. That pattern was likewise meaningless to the eventual successful voluntary split.
Oh, puleeeze!
What is secession but a political "preference"? As for the meaningfulness or lack thereof, this conversation is all about the results of the last election and the attempt to nullify it. Period.
As for demonstrating the differences between urban and rural voters... how in the hell are you going to put together you new seceded state without acknowledging the dichotomy between urban and rural voter intent. Is Texas willing to secede only to lose Houston, Dallas, Ft. Worth and El Paso in a mini secession?
That my friend is the meaningfulness of my argument. In not one single state did Obama or McCain reach a 10% margin of victory, so in what state are you going to find even a 2/3rds majority willing to seceded based upon this purely anti-democratic argument?
I suggest nowhere, which why all this political posturing is not only silly, disingenuous, demagogic, and anti-democratic but down right deleterious to the political and social health of the nation.
What is secession but a political "preference"? As for the meaningfulness or lack thereof, this conversation is all about the results of the last election and the attempt to nullify it. Period.
As for demonstrating the differences between urban and rural voters... how in the hell are you going to put together you new seceded state without acknowledging the dichotomy between urban and rural voter intent. Is Texas willing to secede only to lose Houston, Dallas, Ft. Worth and El Paso in a mini secession?
That my friend is the meaningfulness of my argument. In not one single state did Obama or McCain reach a 10% margin of victory, so in what state are you going to find even a 2/3rds majority willing to seceded based upon this purely anti-democratic argument?
I suggest nowhere, which why all this political posturing is not only silly, disingenuous, demagogic, and anti-democratic but down right deleterious to the political and social health of the nation.
Fort Worth is still majority red. Houston may be voting blue in presidential elections, but I believe still has a slight red majority in state, local, and possibly even congressional elections. Dallas proper may be blue and so are San Antonio, Austin, and El Paso.
However, the SUBURBS of Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston are where something like 50% of all Texans live. These areas are firmly red.
What is secession but a political "preference"? As for the meaningfulness or lack thereof, this conversation is all about the results of the last election and the attempt to nullify it. Period.
Czechosovakia's peaceful split was about cultural differences. It did not follow political voting patterns.
Since I campaigned for Obama, I would certainly not want to nullify the last election, would I? A significant portion of Vermont's citizens (both liberals and conservatives) have also suggested secession. It is not all "political", at least in a partisan sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
As for demonstrating the differences between urban and rural voters... how in the hell are you going to put together you new seceded state without acknowledging the dichotomy between urban and rural voter intent. Is Texas willing to secede only to lose Houston, Dallas, Ft. Worth and El Paso in a mini secession?
That would be a question for Texas citizens. Frankly, it would be extremely unlikely that Texas citizens would actually want to secede. Vermont, OTOH, being a small, more cohesive state, would be a more likely candidate for secession some time in the future.
Almost all nations are composed of both urban and rural areas with different political points of view. And yet nations have reorganized themselves constantly throughout history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
That my friend is the meaningfulness of my argument.
In not one single state did Obama or McCain reach a 10% margin of victory.
[NOTE: Didn't we get rid of this disingenuous "my friend" stuff with McCain?]
Not much of a fact checker, are you?
2008 Obama margin of victory:
Hawaii 45.2% | Vermont 37.2% | Rhodes Island: 27.8% | New York 25.5% | etc. etc.
2008 McCain margin of victory:
Wyoming 32.5% | Oklahoma 31.2% | Utah 27.6% | Idaho 25.4% | etc. etc.
Frankly, it would be extremely unlikely that Texas citizens would actually want to secede.
Exactly. It's not even close to being what the majority of Texans want. I don't understand why people can't see that all this hoo-ha was intentionally stirred up by a governor pandering to the most fanatical faction of his base, who no matter what anyone assumes to know about the complex state of Texas, is NOT the majority.
Let's just wait and see how the next state election turns out in TX.
Almost all nations are composed of both urban and rural areas with different political points of view. And yet nations have reorganized themselves constantly throughout history.
And they also pull back together, like european union nations going with the euro as currency, and OPEC nations aligning their interests. In the marvelous 80's corporate mergers, hostile takeovers, chop shop, change the marquise. Meet the old boss, only this time everyone gets paid less and does more because we had to pay for 'reorganization' to the fifteenth power. Too bad the pitchforks aren't pointed at RNC and DNC respectively.
Exactly. It's not even close to being what the majority of Texans want. I don't understand why people can't see that all this hoo-ha was intentionally stirred up by a governor pandering to the most fanatical faction of his base, who no matter what anyone assumes to know about the complex state of Texas, is NOT the majority.
Let's just wait and see how the next state election turns out in TX.
Kinky Friedman, he has my vote if for nothing else than he is not a politician. I will seriously vote for him if he runs. He is kind of the Jesse Ventura of TX.
Kinky Friedman, he has my vote if for nothing else than he is not a politician. I will seriously vote for him if he runs. He is kind of the Jesse Ventura of TX.
He will be running as a Democrat which is disappointing because I don't think he will make it through the primary. He should run as anything but a Republican or Democrat to show people that a third party is viable. He is a gas and I don't even agree with him on much. He would be a breath of fresh air, that is until he is corrupted like everyone else in DC.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
