The geographic division of a new Union and Confederate states of America

In reality, I think that's not far off the mark. Someone suggested on my similar thread that the new blue America would be the "Communist state of such and such", if this ever happened, I think they'd be more of a slightly righter-wing Canada South.

 

I've wondered if these "blues" have a clue as to where they are going to have food grown?

 

Family is genetic and people disown them all the time. Though I am happy with mine. Countries are culturally defined, and ours is too dysfunctional.

 

Separate countries doesn't mean no trade.

 

I don't think you just because the one city in the state is blue that they get the whole state they shouldn't be allowed to have that they didn't build it. Chances are it's mostly red anyway.

If they get Minnesota Illinois New York and some of the Northeast there and the West Coast of the farmers will leave because they have no hope plus there's farmland all throughout the Mid west. These blue areas wouldn't have anything. It would all look like a Detroit within a matter of months. Maybe years

 

Idiocy. What you don't realize is that neither the blue, or the red, can survive without the other.

Also....why do you need a "landbridge"? There is no land bridge between the Continental USA and Alaska OR Hawaii. Also Texas has a costal line...or did you forget that? So does Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. Oh right...its not about splitting up due to "political and cultural divisions". Its about land. Not surprising.

 

You really think if the U.S. divided into separate nations (we all know this will never happen but just supposing) that the peoples of either nation will be all that positive about trading with the other? Besides which close trade ties will undermine the entire argument in favor of separation in the first place.

 

I think it would end up more like Canada South.

Maybe people would actually get along better if they're not forced to share each other's laws?

Could be win-win?

 

Money's money. We trade quite happily with Canada and they have the kind of laws most devout red-staters despise.

Not necessarily. We get along with Mexico and Canada. They're both different countries with entirely different political systems but we've found a way to be quite neighborly as far as trade is concerned.

 

Instead of splitting the country in two, how would you feel about drastically cutting back on the scope of federal government, and giving each state more power to determine what happens within their borders? You know, like the founding fathers envisioned?

 

You do know that neither Canada nor Mexico were part of the United States for more than two centuries don't you?

 

Yea but two centuries is but a blip in terms of world politics.

Maybe it's better to get things sorted out now while everything's still in the relatively early stages?

If the split's voluntary and everybody gets to live in the new country of their choice, why does it even need to be acrimonious?

I've been married 35+ years and I'm still on friendly terms with a couple of my exes. Wouldn’t want to still be living with them though.

 

You have no clue how monumentally stupid this idea is? Really?

 

Yeah I just don't think the self-centered City dwellers are going to be able to get along without someone doing everything for them and if that's what you got to do you're going to go broke soon.

 

But just food, electricity, water, gasoline all sorts of things.

 

During most of my life people were compatible. The current phenomenon is not that old and it appears to be a problem only in large cities. If you live in or around one then you wouldn't understand that the problem is in your back yard, not mine. My back yard is a hay field.

 

Lol that's a bit vague. I grew up in rural but have lived in urban and suburban as well. Current is suburban. Republican delusions are the main problem. They are promoted because non-delusional Republicans are greedy or prejudiced.

 

Nothing partisan about that, huh?

 

One party could be correct or it could be a mixture. Partisan doesn't mean anything about whether something is correct or not. You were talking about urban areas being a source of some problem but what issues were you talking about

 

Corruption and crime for the most part.

 

Nope. Absolutely not. The whole idea is about a sovereign country, not a state. You get to run your confederate states of America however you please. You don't get to tell us how we run ours. I don't envision any ties whatsoever with you and your ilk.

 

No more a ridiculous idea than splitting up the United States.

 

In Texas vs White, the Supreme Court declared that states could secede if all other states consented, so it is possible to split the union. To ease the pain and grumpiness of sharing a country with me and my ilk, perhaps you should take your suggested split and start lobbying all the state legislatures. It just might work.