Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Should We Split the Two Americas?

It's clear to me there are two Americas: one where people wish to pursue and uphold the ideals put forth in our Constitution, and another that wishes to circumvent them.

Is it time to negotiate a peaceful separation? What say you, DataLoungers?

by Anonymousreply 41July 23, 2019 4:07 PM

Splitting the Red States from the nation is attractive, but it is the wrong choice. It would acknowledge that those people and their ideas have a right to exist. They don't. They must be defeated. The GOP must be destroyed. Their ideas must be discredited and held up to shame. And the purveyors of those ideas must be punished. Punished by shunning where their actions were merely repugnant. Punished by prison or death, where their actions were criminal.

But no, we do not, not ever, allow them to go on by turning a blind eye to it. Search and destroy.

by Anonymousreply 1July 19, 2019 3:07 PM

Absolutely, R1. Well said. I like that it's not appeasement or acceptance, either. Were you in the service?

by Anonymousreply 2July 19, 2019 3:11 PM

The Repubs think the Dems are not upholding Constitutional ideals. The Dems think the same of the Repubs. Who's gonna split the baby?

by Anonymousreply 3July 19, 2019 3:13 PM

If America splits into two, what would all you obsessed cunts have to whinge about?

by Anonymousreply 4July 19, 2019 3:15 PM

The only part of the Constitution deplorables believe in are twisted versions of the first and second amendments.

by Anonymousreply 5July 19, 2019 3:16 PM

Well it's never, ever going to happen so what's the point.

by Anonymousreply 6July 19, 2019 3:17 PM

Agreed, R1. I'm sending an email to CNN to propose a question for the upcoming Democratic debate: Will you commit, right here and now, to never pardoning Donald Trump or any of his children?

I'm not asking for a commitment to investigate and prosecute, but a commitment that should the opportunity, "for the good of the nation, to put this behind us and move on" (as I can see a president saying, thinking that they need to be the reconciler in chief, just like Obama, and Gore before him, did... and we see how well that worked out) by pardoning this shitgibbon. Which will only lead to another shitgibbon coming forward in a few years and doing the same thing because we didn't punish the shitgibbon last time. (Think: Nixon.)

by Anonymousreply 7July 19, 2019 3:17 PM

It's time for California to invade the Southwest. Just fucking consolidate man! Then after we take out Texas, we can start pushing towards the North and Southern Canada.

by Anonymousreply 8July 19, 2019 3:18 PM

LOL R4.

These threads are populated by Boris, Natasha, and OCD Rachel-worshipping political kuntz.

by Anonymousreply 9July 19, 2019 3:28 PM

Believe it or not, whingey, we like being happy. By Boris, R9, you must be referring to your own special brand of cuntery, Mr. fuckface himself, Trump-lite Johnson, the johnson.

Fuck the fuckity fuck off with the Boris and Natasha shit. This ain't no cartoon, bitch.

by Anonymousreply 10July 19, 2019 3:36 PM

If you think Brexit is a mess, it wouldn't hold a candle to the economic fallout dividing the US. Might as well just burn your money now.

by Anonymousreply 11July 19, 2019 3:59 PM

You could never negotiate a split that the deplorable states would agree to as they are primarily net recipients of federal funds.

They would insist on financial payments and assistance that would cost the remaining states MORE money to get rid of them than they current receive.

Additionally, you'd have to negotiate trade deals and currency, military support, and a host of other shared services that would cost a ridiculous amount to duplicate. Finally, when the inevitable mismanagement of one or the other new country leads to its collapse, it would pull the other down without any ability to influence or control policies that could curtail or prevent or remediate that collapse.

by Anonymousreply 12July 19, 2019 4:58 PM

We don't need to agree, R12. Build a fucking wall and cut them off.

by Anonymousreply 13July 21, 2019 3:26 PM

How would you do it, OP? How would you be able to unite the coasts under one country while being separated by the middle?

by Anonymousreply 14July 21, 2019 3:47 PM

Why worry? The blue states have most of the wealth, most of the brains, most of the money, and all of the show tunes. We might have to seize Norfolk and Jacksonville to hang on to the Navy like Putin invaded Crimea, but both Virginia and to a lesser degree, Florida are purple, so it might not be necessary. California and Hawaii are ours. Without a Navy they can't project power so they'll be fucked. And a lot of the young men of fighting age in the Red States will be dead (if they're not already) from opioid use because "all the Jews in New York" will have pulled their money out of Flyoverstan, Inc. and they have no jobs. Or at least that's who the rednecks will blame for not having jobs. Making them incapable of forming an army. "Wars aren't fought on the ground, anymore," you'll say. And you're right. But do you think the Red States, between 'em, have enough smart folks who'll know how to launch the missiles w/o the codes? And who will their allies be? Bolivia? Pakistan? They can't deal with skin tones darker than pink and I can't see, say, the Canadians lining up with 'em.

But most importantly, without the show tunes they don't have a prayer.

I go with massive re-education camps and something in the water to clear their brains so they start out fresh after the re-programming is complete: no more painful memories of their racist assholery to trouble them.

by Anonymousreply 15July 21, 2019 3:48 PM

Won't be much of a "split", OP. More like scattered blue islands severed off.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 16July 21, 2019 3:53 PM

Of course, nothing in r15 will play out as predicted.

* Who do you suppose comprises the bulk of the current military troops?

* Where do you think the majority of what little manufacturing and industry is located?

* Where do you suppose the a significant portion of the nuclear stockpile is housed - and more pointedly, which side is stupid enough to use them against a target like New York City to PROVE they mean business?

* How long do you suppose California would last if water sources controlled by red states were stopped?

People in red states are not going to just sit back and suffer. They will launch an action against the blue states that, as you rightly pointed out, they blame for their situation. They're not just going to hunker down in their crazy survival shelters with their guns. They're going to use them.

by Anonymousreply 17July 21, 2019 4:28 PM

R17 And they will lose, just as the South did in the Civil War.

It won't solve anything - they'll still be left with their stupidity.

Just like the last time.

by Anonymousreply 18July 21, 2019 4:57 PM

R18, in a modern war between Red and Blue, Red wins hands down. They have most of the guns.

by Anonymousreply 19July 21, 2019 5:44 PM

[QUOTE] n a modern war between Red and Blue, Red wins hands down. They have most of the guns.

they’re hicks with guns and mostly obese, they’re not as threatening as you think against an actual army with tactical gear and advanced weaponry.

by Anonymousreply 20July 21, 2019 5:49 PM

[quote] They have most of the guns.

Guns are not how wars are won anymore. The blue states contain the brains who produce the drones, missiles and high tech weaponry which would destroy toothless hillbillies hanging onto their gun. Plus most access to the coasts.

R19's posting number is appropriate because he's posting from the 19th century.

by Anonymousreply 21July 21, 2019 5:50 PM

I think discussing this idea brings up a valid point -- that the red states don't contribute as much tax revenue as the blue states. So ironically, if there was a split, the red states would not have enough money to build an effective military; either that or they would become a South Korean style white nationalist dictatorship that would be very oppressive. Either way, they would eventually be defeated. It's time for the old ideas to die.

by Anonymousreply 22July 21, 2019 6:10 PM

R21 is right. Do they have anything like the Lawrence Livermore Labs (Berkeley) or the Salk Institute (La Jolla) or the Center for Advanced Research (Princeton) or MIT's Lincoln and Draper Labs (Cambridge and Lincoln, MA) in Kansas or Montana or Mississippi? I haven't heard about it if they do. For that matter, do they have anything like Berkeley or Princeton or MIT? I don't think so. And if they did, how long do you think all those bright scientists (don't forget: they're smart people so lotsa Jews and lotsa immigrants) would stay in their poverty-stricken, fucked-up, xenophobic new country before voting with their feet and heading to the coasts?

Who would these breakaway states sell stuff to? The Feds are blockading their only outlets to the sea (by which about 90% of international trade is transported. For that matter, who'd do business with 'em knowing it would piss off the United States. It's been done before (1861 to 1865) and it failed then. It will fail again.

We don't even have to kill 'em - they have weapons that just stun people now. Hopefully putting them into a gentle slumber long enough to disarm them. Now if there were just a way to erase the racist tendencies from their brains while they're "resting," we'd be all set.

by Anonymousreply 23July 21, 2019 6:17 PM

And most conveniently, a split United States ensures that no single country would be able to oppose Russia.

[quote]Do they have anything like the Lawrence Livermore Labs (Berkeley) or the Salk Institute (La Jolla) or the Center for Advanced Research (Princeton) or MIT's Lincoln and Draper Labs (Cambridge and Lincoln, MA) in Kansas or Montana or Mississippi?

Of course, no one has heard of places like Rose Hulman, Georgia Tech, Purdue, UT Austin, Texas A&M, Duke, U of North Carolina, NC State, or Vanderbilt - they may not be MIT or Cal Tech, but they're top schools with top research labs nonetheless.

This isn't Star Trek where some technical McGuffin will win a war. As Afghanistan and Iraq have proven, it's very easy to hold your own against the might of US military ground forces AND high tech equipment for a very long time.

by Anonymousreply 24July 21, 2019 6:31 PM

It's not a question of red STATES and blue STATES. Unfortunately, it's urban vs. rural. If you look at the map above, it looks like most of the country is red. But if you looked closely at those blue spots, they are where the population is - in cities and suburbs, not in farms and ranches. Because of gerrymandering, the farmers and ranchers have a lot more clout when they vote than city folks. In other words, if you have the map diced so that the city representative gets 90% of the vote of his area but the rural representative gets 52% in his district, you have effectively diluted the voting power of all those city voters. Imagine how galling it is to be a liberal in Dallas or Atlanta or Raleigh and see that your state legislature and your state's federal delegation are dominated by ignorant yokels from Dumbfuckistan.

by Anonymousreply 25July 21, 2019 6:45 PM

While you're splitting the country, get rid of Time Zones created by railroads in the 1800s.

by Anonymousreply 26July 21, 2019 7:45 PM

The entire country is purple. You shouldn’t abandon our blue bros and sisters just because they live in the South. If anything, we should support them more!

by Anonymousreply 27July 21, 2019 8:45 PM

Don't waste time worrying about politics, the climate apocalypse will start before we have any hope of getting the political situation sorted out. Just live life like it's your last day, which it could very well be.

by Anonymousreply 28July 21, 2019 10:16 PM

There are one hell of a lot of conservatives living in blue states and a hell of a lot of liberals living in red states, not sure how you could possibly go about dividing the country. The upheaval would be disastrous for everyone and our enemies would just love this.

The blue areas are primarily on the east and west coasts, if they even decided to make a single nation out of those two areas it wouldn't last long with a thousand miles in between them. So you would end up with one large powerful united conservative nation, and most likely two liberal nations, smaller and weaker than the conservative one in the center.

by Anonymousreply 29July 21, 2019 10:28 PM

Ah yes, the Secession Troll. Disappeared in early 2017 and has now returned. Can't imagine why. Not like there's an election coming up or anything.

by Anonymousreply 30July 21, 2019 11:25 PM

We just need Constitutional reform that repeals the Electoral college, stops gerrymandering and stops giving disproportionate power to the Senate and rural territories.

If the majority truly rules in this so-called "democracy," then we wouldn't have this Trump/Dumb Dubya Bush nonsense.

by Anonymousreply 31July 21, 2019 11:52 PM

[quote]It's time for California to invade the Southwest.

A larger number of Californians voted for Trump in '16 than in most of the red states. Just saying.

by Anonymousreply 32July 21, 2019 11:58 PM

Daniel Webster had the right of it. “Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable.”

by Anonymousreply 33July 22, 2019 12:00 AM

[quote] Should We Split the Two Americas?

Only if you want to surrender even more world power to the Russians.

by Anonymousreply 34July 22, 2019 12:02 AM

r1 you can say the GOP needs to be destroyed but they are aided by the corporate Democrats that also take money from the Oligarchs. I guess you are just going to overlook Bill Clinton's presidency and how he moved Dems to the "center" which was more like liberal Republican than anything. I guess you are also going to overlook Obama and how his appointments mirrored many of those who were in Bush II cabinet positions. He also gave the FDA over the Monsanto. Shall we talk about drones?

If you are a real Democrat you can't ignore that the party has been hijacked by corporate interests and the DNC only wants candidates who will tow the line for billionaires. Stop talking like the Dems are pure, we aren't.

by Anonymousreply 35July 22, 2019 12:05 AM

Oh, stop, R35.

The previous Dem President before Clinton was...Carter! Served 4 years, as a reaction to Watergate, he should have had 8. Aside from him, you have to go back to LBJ, to find another Dem!

Clinton was the Dem that could get elected at his time. He did win nomination against other Dems, after all.

by Anonymousreply 36July 22, 2019 12:18 AM

All the Red states would have to do is shut off the food and water. Blue lives primarily in cities with fragile infrastructure. There'd be hunger riots in 6 months (probably less). And don't tell me California supplies large amounts of food, those areas are Red and also highly dependent on water diverted from Red states.

by Anonymousreply 37July 22, 2019 3:09 PM

Why do so many posters assume that after a split the two countries would be attacking each other? Likely just the opposite is true, they would get along better than ever since each side can govern their own as they wish. They would trade and probably have a common defense pack.

by Anonymousreply 38July 22, 2019 10:35 PM

They might fight each other over Israel, I can see the red states being pro-Israeli and the blue ones pro-Palestinian.

by Anonymousreply 39July 22, 2019 10:41 PM

I think they would fight over all the differences over which they are to be split up.

Plus, each side would want to protect their sympathizers in the other territory. The Reds would also especially want to fight to protect unborn fetuses subject to abortion in the Blue states.

by Anonymousreply 40July 22, 2019 10:57 PM

Nah, they're too lazy for that. Give them the utopia they desire, allow all the blue folks to migrate with nice cash incentives and a reliable test before entry, and build the razor wired walls with guards every 10 feet. I'd love it if we hired only recent immigrants for that job with orders to shoot to kill.

by Anonymousreply 41July 23, 2019 4:07 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!