Blue states secede!

Oh, and that "civilized" comment a while back was damned arrogant, and I don't think that jesuswasamonkey was overreacting at all. He was just getting fucking pissed off at a condescending comment. The "wild west" and the "dirty south" (note the quotations...because they are nicknames...get that?) are no less civilized than the west coast and north/northeast. To think so is just being an asshat bigot.

 

Whatever. You guys need to either address the points I made about secession, or just stop talking to me about it at all. I'm not apologizing for the "civilized" comment, so you may as well stop whining about it.

 

^ well thus far your 'points' are based around an overgeneralized 'map' of the people and egocentric and highly flawed assumptions. The basis for your argument is tripe so it really can't go much further until that's adressed.

 

As I said, nations need SOME kind of geographic border. Of course the map of electoral votes isn't a perfect indicator of political ideology, but it's a good start. You can tinker with it from there...such as keeping eastern California as part of the "Red States", giving eastern Ohio to the "Blue States", etc.

There's no question that most Vermont residents and most Texas residents have different political views. Secession would allow everyone to have a more localized, representative government.

 

i remember reading an article from a southern conservative who actually supported succession more than any northern liberal. but there are other maps out there (i'll try to find the link) that broke down the country even more, into about 10 different voting categories. it was a very interesting website, it explained alot about the voting differences of americans.

 

Is this the map you're referring to?

http://www.massinc.org/commonwealth/new_map_exclusive/ten_regions.html

I like this map too. It is much more accurate than the electoral map. If one so desired, one could still divide the nation into two nations: For example, the Northeast Corridor, Upper Coasts, Great Lakes, El Norte, and Big River regions could be the "Blue States," and the Southern Lowlands, Farm Belt, Appalachia, Southern Comfort, and Sagebrush regions could be the "Red States."

 

yeah, that's exactly it man... thanks for that.

 

man, i remember reading about this subject for a while around election time. they explained everything about the differences between voters from "red" areas and voters from "blue" areas. let me say this... i understand not all red states are full of republicans (except utah) and not all blue states are just democrats. but with this above map, if you read the details about the different regions, this is very true. they explain how people in large metropolitan areas, whether they are in red or blue states, tend to vote liberal. but where there are larger populations, states like NY, CA, PA, MA, NJ, etc..., there are more democratic voters. they even go into detail about how places in the "El Norte" region are heavily influenced by hispanic voters who vote democrat, which is very true coming from a northeast liberal living in miami.

ok i don't really know where i was going, kinda stoned... but that's a very good website i think everyone should read.

 

Red states would take over the blue states so quickly, blue states would be so isolated geographically. You all are forgetting that California was highly republican and Texas was highly democrat less than 40 years ago.

 

By the way, I live in Texas too...

 

I vote for that

 

There are no red or blue states. All the states are purple. Some are a 49/51 shade of purple some are 51/49 purple.

 

They may have changed parties, but they haven't changed ideologies over the past 40 years. California is a liberal state that likes to elect libertarian-leaning politicians, and has been for its entire existence. Texas is a conservative-leaning state that like to elect authoritarians, and has been for at least the past half century.

 

California is far from libertarian, and always has been. "Liberal" and "Libertarian" are two very different things. But to split hairs, Ann Richards was a very liberal governor of Texas in the nineties, and Arnold Swartzenegger is a very conservative Governor of California. But of course, you're a political buff so you probably already know that.

 

Right, but of course there is an overlap. California has been more liberal than conservative, but more libertarian than anything else. It's almost always been a socially liberal and fiscally conservative state. You won't find the Swedish tax rates on the West Coast that you find in New England.

Not true. Just because you dislike Arnold doesn't make him a conservative (and CERTAINLY not "very conservative"). Of the four points on the political compass, Arnold is definitely closer to libertarianism than conservatism. There are almost no so-called "moral" issues where he agrees with the Religious Right, and he is a strong advocate of civil rights and freedom of expression...traits often found in liberals and libertarians, but rarely in conservatives or authoritarians.

You are probably right about Ann Richards (although I don't think she was all THAT liberal...more of a moderate IMO), but she was the exception, not the rule. Generally speaking, Texas elects conservative authoritarians from both political parties.

 

here's something that DIRECTLY relates to the original topic of this thread. I suggest everyone check it out: www.secession.net

it looks pretty big...

 

Jesusmonkey just gave me a bad rep.

Must have pissed him off with the confederate flag remark. Hey, JWAM...lets get us some robes and go hang us some darkies. Hee-haw!

 

*insert sarcasm here*

Yeah, why should I be offended at stereotypes and discrimination direted at me? Why, since I live in Texas I must be a racist, so I don't have any rights anyways. I apologise for the remark, I had temporarily forgotten that it's ok to make fun of people from the south. Please carry on with your prejudice.

Oh, and that "hang us a darkie" comment was really funny. People in the south really think that the KKK is a joke and we really like it when people make light of a terrible blight on our history.

*insert sarcasm here*

Back to reality, I would have expected the regulars on a "hippy" board to be a little less prejudiced towards their fellow man. I don't know if you guys have heard yet, but it is just as offensive to make fun of and discriminate against someone because of where they live as it is to do so based on the color of their skin. We aren't all a bunch of ignorant rednecks down here, and we don't really appreciate the suggestions that we are. It is not funny to us, it is offensive.

So please, stop being an asshole, you are not better than me because of the state you live in, and I don't take the suggestion that you are lightly.

I would like to direct you to article 4 of the Forum Posting Guidelines:

Flames are posts intended to insult and provoke. Posters who speak incessantly and/or rabidly on some relatively uninteresting subject or with a patently ridiculous attitude will be banned. Repeated posts directed with hostility at a particular person or group of people or their beliefs will be cause for banning. Any individual who chronically trolls, who regularly posts arguments, flames or personal attacks for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion will be banned.

 

I got a better idea.
The part of town i live in has been, shall we say, forgotten. Most people don't have a fuckin clue where we are, and the city forgets to do roadwork a lot of the time. If everyone on the hipforums came here we could secceed for a coupla years before anyone would notice.

But, it's a dumb, dumb, dumb, fucking thing to believe that people in the north are inherently smarter than people in the south. Okay, so they live in the south, but hey, to each there own right.

The only non-racist, peace-before-violence, and all around good guy i know that lives in pittsburgh if from Texas, so i know that theoretically they are not all assholes.

Now, i think we should give texas back to mexico, but that's another point entirely.

 

Thats a good idea, except I would ignore the people who are stupid enough to put a blue or red sticker on their head and label themselves, and talk to all the people who see how much bullshit the democrat/republican system is.

Peace and Love,
Dan