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 said we can all live together but have two different governments sharing the same country.
Republicans would have lower taxes and lower social services spending.
Democrats would have higher taxes but more entitlement and social services spending.
Republicans could own and carry guns, democrats could not.
Democrats could get abortions, republicans could not.
Gay democrats could get married, gay republicans could not.
Democrats could only get electricity from solar or wind power, republicans could use whatever.
I guess democrats would okay unchecked immigration but they'd have to foot the bills for them. Any republican adversely affected by immigrants would be reimbursed by the democrats who would have to pay. Likewise a republican committing a crime would make the republicans responsible for any costs to democrats. And vice versa.
Maybe a house divided can stand, let's see what happens.
What a silly argument! I go along with what Gore Vidal said, back in the 1970's: Essentially, we only have one political party in this country, one part swings left, one part swings right!
Even Gore Vidal advocating splitting up this country.
Think! California is about the same size as Germany!
Didn't we try this once? Seems like it didn't end very well.
Yeah it didn't end well because because the union was forced back together. The civil war was a good indication that this whole union thing wasn't such a great idea in the first place.
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.