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.
I don't consider myself a true conservative but I tend to lean right. I find talk of secession to be rather unthought out and down right silly actually. What he's talking about here isn't actually secession however. More like states becoming either all left in demographic make up or all right. And then the population shifts location along political lines and we have a liberal country bordering a conservative one.
Simply put it won't happen. There are way more people in the middle than there are combined on either end. Disolving the Union is not high on our list. While giving far leftists and far right types their own countries I can talk about in a joking manner, as a serious proposal within these borders is ludicrous.
He talks about a war that would unite the two camps to the common good of all, but the way things are I don't even see that happening. This is a mildly interesting opinion piece, but overall I would grade it at a C.
I'm a liberal and I like the idea. It really makes more sense. Half this country has zero in common with the other half and better to part as (sort of) friends. I think the country would get along much better if states had more independence and states didn't feel they were funding the bad decisions of other states. If my blue state wants to create health care coverage, they could do it and create rules so that refugees from other states would not qualify until they had paid into the system for a decade or two. If we want to put our focus on education and technology, we can do that while other states can try to bring back coal.
I'm a liberal and I like the idea. It really makes more sense. Half this country has zero in common with the other half and better to part as (sort of) friends. I think the country would get along much better if states had more independence and states didn't feel they were funding the bad decisions of other states. If my blue state wants to create health care coverage, they could do it and create rules so that refugees from other states would not qualify until they had paid into the system for a decade or two. If we want to put our focus on education and technology, we can do that while other states can try to bring back coal.
One of the stipulations would be that your blue state would have to take all of the democrats from other states that are on welfare and food stamps. My how things would change.
I'm a liberal and I like the idea. It really makes more sense. Half this country has zero in common with the other half and better to part as (sort of) friends. I think the country would get along much better if states had more independence and states didn't feel they were funding the bad decisions of other states. If my blue state wants to create health care coverage, they could do it and create rules so that refugees from other states would not qualify until they had paid into the system for a decade or two. If we want to put our focus on education and technology, we can do that while other states can try to bring back coal.
But it's not that simple. Not everyone is a straight liberal or conservative. Many of us are moderates. Many are social one way, fiscally another. I can't think of anyone that I have absolutely zero in common with.
I suppose there are 50 states to work with (unless you are changing that around too), but how would this even happen fiscally for millions of people to up and move to the areas of the nation that they theoretically would fit in best?
I'm a liberal and I like the idea. It really makes more sense. Half this country has zero in common with the other half and better to part as (sort of) friends. I think the country would get along much better if states had more independence and states didn't feel they were funding the bad decisions of other states. If my blue state wants to create health care coverage, they could do it and create rules so that refugees from other states would not qualify until they had paid into the system for a decade or two. If we want to put our focus on education and technology, we can do that while other states can try to bring back coal.
I agree. Why should a group of rural midwestern residents in the minority rule the coastal urban majority? It is totally absurd. Different priorities. Different economies. Different cultures.
If the coastal states want to protect themselves from the encroaching harm of global warming, and the Luddite that the rural residents elected refuses, because he believes it is a 'Chinese' hoax, it is patently ridiculous for the coastal states to not do what is in their best interest. Time for civil disobedience--bigly. It is the same in Florida. Liberal Southern Florida, which generates 70% of the state's income is being ruled by a conservative religious group of northern Floridians. This makes no sense at all.
It honestly feels the same as the sensibility that generated the Revolutionary War. Taxation without representation. Why should blue states generating higher income have to pay for the backwards policies of the regressive red states?
Trump is the defining factor--the line in the sand. He is a divisive idiot, as demonstrated by his moronic self-serving campaign rally in Iowa, which simply was a an excuse for the immature jerk to vent. This is getting old and tired and the rest of the country is losing patience with his stupidity and selfish BS. Nothing is going to improve under this lunatic and it is becoming clearer by the day. If anyone can tear this country in two--he can and will.
One of the stipulations would be that your blue state would have to take all of the democrats from other states that are on welfare and food stamps. My how things would change.
Deal. Red states can take all the disability recipients. Wait, they mostly already do, since the top five states on disability (which includes Medicare and is a lifetime benefit) are in the south.
Welfare is temporary. I would do this deal all day long.
One of the stipulations would be that your blue state would have to take all of the democrats from other states that are on welfare and food stamps. My how things would change.
That would be fine. But it's not just dems on welfare and food stamps...republicans are as well. Are you ok dealing with them?
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.
