Red States/Blue States: Let's kiss and break up

thebullet

Rebel without applause
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Posts
1,247
One hundred and forty-four years ago the Red States decided that they could no longer comfortably coexist with the Blue States in American society. The Blue States, stupidly, disagreed.

Okay, so it wasn't our finest hour. We insisted that the Red States should stay in the fold, give up their property (slaves) and act like good little Blue State clones. That was a mistake, no denying it. The two groups of states have grown more and more estranged from each other. It has now reached the point that there are two seperate value systems extant, one for each group of states.

The country as a whole is pretty equally divided between Red and Blue at this point in time, so from election to election the balance flips back and forth from Red to Blue. The result is a Jekyll and Hyde-like government that completely changes its outlook, policies, and philosophy every four or eight years.

It's reached the point that Reds and Blues can no longer be civil to each other. What appears obvious to one side is anethema to the other. One side's 'value system' is the other side's bigotry and indifference. One side's faith is the other side's arrogance. One side's openness is the other side's indecision.

Let's face it, folks. We are a totally divided nation, and it isn't just a new phenomenun. It has been true in some way since before (one side's) Civil War or (the other side's) War for Southern Independence.

I say, give those Southern states their independence. Throw in some of the Southwestern and Midwestern states for good measure. Allow the East coast, the left coast, and the industrial North to form a government meaningful to themselves.

Make a non-agression pact between the two entities as part of the disolution agreement, otherwise the Red States will try to conquer the Blue States as soon as the ink is dry so they can spread their gospel of Faith, purity and Intelligent Design.

Red States: The War for Southern Indepence was just an opening move! If at first you don't secede, try, try again.
 
thebullet said:
Red States: The War for Southern Indepence was just an opening move! If at first you don't secede, try, try again.

Cute.

I volunteer to stay in the mid-west, be the voice of moderate reason and a lover of the good old ultraviolence. That, and with the young one on the way, we have way better schools here, so that choice is obvious.
 
Can I move into the Unibombers old cabin? It's small, secluded, and only a few hours from home and family.
 
No, no, no. Don't do this. This isn't really funny.

And as serious liberal living in a solid RED state I disagree.

Remove the Electoral College. Thus, no Red or Blue states.

The problems will still be there, yes. But politicians will struggle for awhile to find ways in which to label and categorize groups of people.

Who knows? Maybe we could learn to coexist.

(It could happen - and yes, I'm currently insane because of non-stop shopping for school clothes - what can I say?)
 
sweetsubsarahh said:
No, no, no. Don't do this. This isn't really funny.

And as serious liberal living in a solid RED state I disagree.

Remove the Electoral College. Thus, no Red or Blue states.

The problems will still be there, yes. But politicians will struggle for awhile to find ways in which to label and categorize groups of people.

Who knows? Maybe we could learn to coexist.

(It could happen - and yes, I'm currently insane because of non-stop shopping for school clothes - what can I say?)

True, and that would be nice, but the electorial college (much as I hate the hell out of it) is there for a reason. If the politicians were just going for sheer numbers of votes, there'd be no reason to stop in Hawaii, Alaska, Montana, the Dakotas, (or most of the midwest). Their primary goal would be in securing larger states and population groups and then it's just a number of people who like their candidate the best. In the long run it wouldn't work any better, and it would take away impact from states such as the afforementioned mid-west and small population states....so while my vote doesn't matter now, if the college was gone, it not only wouldn't matter, but it would be flat out ignored.

Then we'd have to rely on our Senators and Representatives to do their thing, and I don't know about all y'all, but I know how that's working out for Iowa....
 
sweetsubsarahh said:
Who knows? Maybe we could learn to coexist.

I know that there will be some sorting out to do, as the Pennsylvania rednecks move south and the bleeding hearts in Kansas realize they better not be in Kansas anymore.

But after the chips fall, it'll all work out. Coexistence is for pussies. I learned that from the neocons.
 
thebullet said:
But after the chips fall, it'll all work out. Coexistence is for pussies. I learned that from the neocons.

I learned that from the Romans. Good ol' Imperial unity. If you're not what we are, you'd better be changing your tune!
 
The_Darkness said:
True, and that would be nice, but the electorial college (much as I hate the hell out of it) is there for a reason. If the politicians were just going for sheer numbers of votes, there'd be no reason to stop in Hawaii, Alaska, Montana, the Dakotas, (or most of the midwest). Their primary goal would be in securing larger states and population groups and then it's just a number of people who like their candidate the best. In the long run it wouldn't work any better, and it would take away impact from states such as the afforementioned mid-west and small population states....so while my vote doesn't matter now, if the college was gone, it not only wouldn't matter, but it would be flat out ignored.

Then we'd have to rely on our Senators and Representatives to do their thing, and I don't know about all y'all, but I know how that's working out for Iowa....


But that's the same as it is now.

The politicians don't stump in states that are predominantly red or blue - they don't have to. They go for those swing states, hoping to turn the tide so they can win all the votes for that one state. Some of those states received quite a few visits from campaigning folks- some received none. And that's ridiculous.

And do you think my Kansas vote counted? No. What a hopeless feeling, knowing that someone's vote in a swing state actually meant more than mine.

There is no purpose for what is now an outmoded system.
 
thebullet said:
I know that there will be some sorting out to do, as the Pennsylvania rednecks move south and the bleeding hearts in Kansas realize they better not be in Kansas anymore.

But after the chips fall, it'll all work out. Coexistence is for pussies. I learned that from the neocons.

And my daddy's a Pennsylvania redneck.

He'll kick both yer asses.

:cathappy:
 
sweetsubsarahh said:
But that's the same as it is now.

The politicians don't stump in states that are predominantly red or blue - they don't have to. They go for those swing states, hoping to turn the tide so they can win all the votes for that one state. Some of those states received quite a few visits from campaigning folks- some received none. And that's ridiculous.

And do you think my Kansas vote counted? No. What a hopeless feeling, knowing that someone's vote in a swing state actually meant more than mine.

There is no purpose for what is now an outmoded system.

True enough. I think Iowa was hit up something like half a dozen times right at the end because we were considered a cruical swing state....and yes, you're right, it is crap.

The problem isn't with the system, but with the conglomeration of possible voters. there's just too goddamn many of us....350+ million people is a country with too many people with too many views and too many regional problems to properly govern by one over-reaching government. The Roman Empire fell because of interal problems more so than any other factor, and damn near all other factors combined....it was only slightly larger than the contiental US at its height.

I'm not advocating secession from the US for any state or block of states, but I have to look at the big picture in light of history and ask myself "would this really be a bad thing?"
 
Penelope Street said:
My thoughts exactly. That's why I'll never marry another man.
K.

But what are your thought on copulation?
 
As a thinking person, living in a seemingly non-thinking state, I have to disagree with this proposal. Moderates HAVE to take control at some point. The fate of the nation hinges upon common sense becoming much more common than it is currently.
 
Geez:

Everyone is certainly taking this thread a lot more seriouly than I intended it to be taken. Mostly my opening remarks were tongue in cheek.

I've gotta say that a lot of people think this whole thing is pretty appealing.

Okay, I'm on board. Let's dump them damn Reds.
 
Not funny at all, bullet.

If you can't compromise within a country, what makes you think that two separate countries will get along any better?
 
RGraham said:
Not funny at all, bullet.
If you can't compromise within a country, what makes you think that two separate countries will get along any better?
Why so grim, RG? I wasn't really advocating breaking up the country. I was just kidding. Sorry if you misunderstood. Sorry if it appeared that I was advocating the disolution of the US. Hey, the neocons can't take a joke either. By this time tomorrow the Secret Service will probably have me in custody.

Crap, I had to open my mouth.
 
thebullet said:
Why so grim, RG? I wasn't really advocating breaking up the country. I was just kidding. Sorry if you misunderstood. Sorry if it appeared that I was advocating the disolution of the US. Hey, the neocons can't take a joke either. By this time tomorrow the Secret Service will probably have me in custody.

Crap, I had to open my mouth.

Sorry. In a dark mood.

Plus I've been been working on a outline of The Second American Civil War for a story that's been bouncing around in my mind.

In case you're wondering, the same people won that one as won the Yugoslavian Civil War.
 
thebullet said:
Everyone is certainly taking this thread a lot more seriouly than I intended it to be taken.
I beg to differ that I took it seriously. Sure, splitting up seems easy, but there are all kinds of tricky issues that make it far from simple, like who gets stuck with Texas? :p
 
Back
Top