50 replies to this topic

[Kisseena]

Well, people from 20 states started a petition to "peacefully secede" from the United States of America. Because Barack Obama won the election.

I--I have no words. Did they not learn the first time.
It's not just the southern states this time around.

Just... here. You guys read it. I'm gonna go flip some tables.

Click here for this crazyness.

The article says it's not likely to happen, but the thought of people wanting to do this makes me mad. Like, really? COME ON.

Edited by Kisseena, 12 November 2012 - 08:22 PM.

[Sir Deimos]

Civil War 2. It's a coming.

[Sir Turtlelot]

As unlikely as the whole thing may be, I'm still not surprised to see Indiana on that list. -___-

If we do secede, can you guys at least wait until I finish school? I already transferred universities once, and it was not a fun process. I have a feeling that an out of state transfer would be even worse.

Edited by Sir Turtlelot, 12 November 2012 - 08:42 PM.

[Selena]

I've often wondered how different history would have been if the South had been allowed to secede. One land for the progressives, another for the conservatives, and each free to do as they like without interference.

These petitions usually go nowhere, but it seems like polarization is getting worse and these sort of things steadily become more common and popular. I would not be surprised if, somewhere down the line, a second Civil War happened. We don't really believe in bipartisan efforts or cooperation - most attempts to reach across the aisle don't work out too well.

End of the day, liberal philosophies are incompatible with conservative ones, and you're always stuck trying to make uncomfortable compromises to keep people from raging. Sometimes you take the strengths of both arguments and hammer out the weaknesses. Most of the time you just get something watered down.

[Egann]

What would have happened with the south. Well, here's the sparknotes of my thoughts.

With no bad blood remaining between them, the South would have almost certainly reintegrated with Union by the end of World War I at latest. Britain would have substantially increased pressure on the South to abolish slavery, and abolition was gaining steam locally, anyway. Between that, and the desire for trade again with (local) industry in the North, there wouldn't be any more reason to remain separate.

And then, thousands of changes come World War II and things get impossible to predict.

So...ON TOPIC.


States threaten secession all the time. No, really. ALL. THE. TIME. It's no big deal until the legislatures actually begin to push papers, and even then it's basically playing chicken with the Feds. And speaking of the feds, if any state ever did push secession paperwork, the signers would probably find themselves in unmarked black body bags.

[Steel Samurai]

The clincher will be the next generation. If they remain as conservative as their parents, then it would not surprise me if the US fractures or has another civil war. If they get sick of the extremism on both sides, then maybe things will go back to being the way they were.

Obama seems to be the most controversial president since Lincoln, despite not doing things that much differently than Bush.

[J-Roc]

Civil War 2. It's a coming.

Shoulda voted for Canada.

[JRPomazon]

The clincher will be the next generation. If they remain as conservative as their parents, then it would not surprise me if the US fractures or has another civil war. If they get sick of the extremism on both sides, then maybe things will go back to being the way they were.

Obama seems to be the most controversial president since Lincoln, despite not doing things that much differently than Bush.

This is coming from left field, but I feel it needs to be said.

Lincoln inherited the elephant in the room that had been there since the founding of this nation. (In Obama's case, the elephant from 8 years before his presidency. This is also where the similarities end for the most part.) His predecessors had either come from southern states and had no interest in outlawing slavery or had completely ignored the issue since they figured nothing could be done about it with the time they had in office while tensions began to mount on both sides while pre-existing laws were being blatantly ignored. Lincoln inherited a mess and did everything in his power to make sure that the country didn't splinter, he was even forced to go against his own moral code to bargain with the southern states that they might be able to maintain some level of ownership over their slaves in order to keep it from spreading to new territories. What he got was the Civil War. But in the end he managed to not only save the United States' union but also completely abolished slavery in this country. And mind you, he lost a son in the war and his wife went crazy with grief and he ended up with a bullet in his head because he took a stance and did what needed to be done. This was not something he got out of without a scratch.

Barack Obama uses Lincoln as a pedestal to raise himself up, as if his very existence is somehow a great accomplishment for the United States because he's the first black president. He's Lincoln's legacy in the White House. Barack Obama is not the legacy Lincoln left behind. Barack Obama isn't even half the man Lincoln was because when the shit hits the fan it isn't going to be Barack Obama coming to save us with his charisma or his promises of change and reform for the betterment of the United States. It's going to be him blaming the guys before him that it's their fault, or it's going to the Senate's fault, or your fault because you didn't believe in change and pixies and the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow enough. And it isn't going to be him taking any of the damage or suffering like the families who have been hit hard in the recession. He's set for life. Four more years till he gets to retire and give the problems to someone else.

Sure he's had his victories in places where a more conservative president might have been hesitant to do anything in. This year's election is going to bring a number of big changes to this country just from the ballot questions alone. But comparing Lincoln to Obama and vice versa in any way, regardless of how controversial the two men are I feel is disrespectful to Abraham Lincoln, who actually governed a nation at war to bring the change to keep the country together. Barack Obama has done nothing of his caliber during his first term and I don't imagine he'll impress me with the next four years.

Now, on the topic of the these 20 states. As of now, I'm not concerned about these states leaving the union. And like Steel Samurai said, it'll all depend on the next generation and what they might do in the future. But frankly, I don't blame them for being this way. I'm sure the conservative Republican Party is busy toiling away to devise a new plan to take back Washington D.C.

Edited by Game Master JRPomazon, 12 November 2012 - 10:42 PM.

[Selena]

I... don't think Steel was comparing the two as actual presidents - just that they both flare up extreme emotions. Of course Lincoln had greater accomplishments.

But, really, lots of presidents have been extremely polarizing. My grandmother remembers the night FDR was elected and how all the free-market conservatives thought the world was going to end. Which it didn't. But a lot of them still think it did. And then, of course, there's Kennedy. Reagan won landslides but became something of a dividing line. Carter. Polarization has been building up for... well, since the first Civil War.

[JRPomazon]

Sorry, I was sort of in a daze for a few minutes there. Sorta . . . blanked out . . .

Oh god . . . what did I do . . . who did I hurt?

[Fëanen]

Surprised Alaska's not on the list. They've got a nascent secession movement anyway, just like the Texans regularly grumble about it. Less surprised to see New York, since there's actually two New Yorks - the one around Manhattan and the big, mostly rural bits to the north. Hell, there's groups of people in the north who've talked about seceding from the state and establishing a new one. I've heard California has a similar divide.

[Chiaki]

What I wonder is if secession would be so bad. Maybe it would have been back then, but what about now? If we were to split tomorrow, where would we be in a generation or two? Why do we work so hard to keep such a large, culturally diverse country together?

[SOAP]

Yeah... I didn't even need to read the article to know that Texas would be on that list...

OMGI'MFACEPALMINGSOHARDRIGHTNOW!

[TheAvengerLever]

I've actually been following this for quite some time, and though I think they are being a little melodramatic and I don't agree with their reasoning, I'm all for a secession. It could do this country some good, I think. In the long run.

[canas is back]

honestly the way Sacramento treats the central valley and the rural parts of California, I am surprised that California hasn't split itself. That said it might be a good thing who knows, each country would take care of less people and be better able to fill needs, maybe.

[J-Roc]

I don't really see that as a new thing. Most provinces in Canada grumble about this from time to time as well.

[Sir Turtlelot]

Relevant



Edit: Oh and just an update. The number of states has been boosted to 33, with Texas and Loiusiana have surpassed the 25,000 vote minimum to issue an offical response, with Loiusiana around 29,000 and Texas around 73,000.

Edited by Sir Turtlelot, 13 November 2012 - 12:43 PM.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

So... the population of Tennessee in 2011 was 6,403,353 according to Google. the number of signatures on the Tennessee secession petition is 20,753. the minimum number required is 25,000. That means about 0.32% of the people of Tennessee definitely want to secede and even if they were to achieve the minimum number required, that would only be 0.4% of the Tennessee population. Can 0.4% of the population really dictate the fate of the state?

Hm, let's have a look at Texas. They've got a population (2011 figure again) of 25,674,681 and have achieved 77,790 signatures. So, that's 0.3% of the population of Texas. That's even worse than Tennessee!

Looks like a case of sour grapes to me.

Edited by Wolf O'Donnell, 13 November 2012 - 02:57 PM.

[Ikiosho]

Puerto Rico wants to be a state and Texas doesn't. Let's trade!

[Fëanen]

So... the population of Tennessee in 2011 was 6,403,353 according to Google. the number of signatures on the Tennessee secession petition is 20,753. the minimum number required is 25,000. That means about 0.32% of the people of Tennessee definitely want to secede and even if they were to achieve the minimum number required, that would only be 0.4% of the Tennessee population. Can 0.4% of the population really dictate the fate of the state?

Hm, let's have a look at Texas. They've got a population (2011 figure again) of 25,674,681 and have achieved 77,790 signatures. So, that's 0.3% of the population of Texas. That's even worse than Tennessee!

Looks like a case of sour grapes to me.

Yeah, there's no way in hell that such a tiny minority of any given state could ever cause secession. This is more of a petulant protest. Hell, if secession threats even were carried out (and I don't see it anywhere in the near future, barring a bizarre upheaval) I can see a lot of states dividing over the issue like Virginia did during the Civil War.

[Sir Turtlelot]

So... the population of Tennessee in 2011 was 6,403,353 according to Google. the number of signatures on the Tennessee secession petition is 20,753. the minimum number required is 25,000. That means about 0.32% of the people of Tennessee definitely want to secede and even if they were to achieve the minimum number required, that would only be 0.4% of the Tennessee population. Can 0.4% of the population really dictate the fate of the state?

Hm, let's have a look at Texas. They've got a population (2011 figure again) of 25,674,681 and have achieved 77,790 signatures. So, that's 0.3% of the population of Texas. That's even worse than Tennessee!

Looks like a case of sour grapes to me.

What makes it worse, is that the not all of the people who signed those petitions actually live in those states, thus lowering those percentages either farther down.

Puerto Rico wants to be a state and Texas doesn't. Let's trade!

That's what I was saying.

[Ikiosho]

I mean, I like Mexican food anyways. We could have all of it we ever wanted, right Kisseena?

[Kisseena]

HOW WOULD PUERTO RICO MAKE MEXICAN FOOD?!

[Ikiosho]

Because they're Mexican?

EDIT: This is just a running joke between Kissy and I. I'm aware of the differences between Puerto Rico and Mexico. They still make good food though.

Edited by Jake the Dog, 13 November 2012 - 04:44 PM.

[Oberon Storm]

Relevant

Edit: Oh and just an update. The number of states has been boosted to 33, with Texas and Loiusiana have surpassed the 25,000 vote minimum to issue an offical response, with Loiusiana around 29,000 and Texas around 73,000.

I signed.

So... the population of Tennessee in 2011 was 6,403,353 according to Google. the number of signatures on the Tennessee secession petition is 20,753. the minimum number required is 25,000. That means about 0.32% of the people of Tennessee definitely want to secede and even if they were to achieve the minimum number required, that would only be 0.4% of the Tennessee population. Can 0.4% of the population really dictate the fate of the state?

Hm, let's have a look at Texas. They've got a population (2011 figure again) of 25,674,681 and have achieved 77,790 signatures. So, that's 0.3% of the population of Texas. That's even worse than Tennessee!

Looks like a case of sour grapes to me.

Really I think the petition is more for Obama to give his approval should should the majority of the state make that choice.

Because they're mexican?

If I identified with my half Mexican side at all I might be offended. As it is though, carry on.

Edited by Chief Fire Storm, 13 November 2012 - 04:43 PM.

[Sir Turtlelot]

If Texas does secede, I say we build a fence around it. Just because.

[Elvenlord]

LET ME OUT FIRST D:

[SteveT]

A high-powered laser fence.

I'm calling it now. The butt-hurt over this election is officially preposterous.

[SOAP]

If Texas does secede, I say we build a fence around it. Just because.

LET ME OUT FIRST D:

Yeah guys! Some of us are still here. D:

[Sir Turtlelot]

If Texas does secede, I say we build a fence around it. Just because.

LET ME OUT FIRST D:

Yeah guys! Some of us are still here. D:

I figured we could have some sort of trade before hand. The sensible people of Texas for the rest of the crazy right wingers elsewhere. Then we build a fence, and replace Texas with Puerto Rico.

Everyone wins, I think.