A civil war doesn’t make sense. The political difference boundaries aren’t at
the state level. In most states, it’s
more rural vs urban, so you have a dense pocket of blue surrounded by a sea of
red. I also don’t think the majority of team
red and team blue are that different in actuality. I think a civil war only makes sense if you
assume that all of members of each team are the crazy stereotypes the internet
tries to convince you are actually popular.
That said, I definitely think that the elites are trying to
split America into smaller, less powerful chunks that don’t have a Bill of
Rights.
Quote: @medaille said:
A civil war doesn’t make sense. The political difference boundaries aren’t at
the state level. In most states, it’s
more rural vs urban, so you have a dense pocket of blue surrounded by a sea of
red. I also don’t think the majority of team
red and team blue are that different in actuality. I think a civil war only makes sense if you
assume that all of members of each team are the crazy stereotypes the internet
tries to convince you are actually popular.
That said, I definitely think that the elites are trying to
split America into smaller, less powerful chunks that don’t have a Bill of
Rights.
i think the red/blue divide is pretty wide already and growing, I am sure it varies on where you are in the country, but rural America is losing its mind over the idiocy in DC and most blue states, I am sure those in the metro areas that vote blue think the same of the rural red states, but if the blue metro parts of the country continue to send the idiots to DC that they have been, that keep the country on the shit slide we are on, I dont see what is going to keep the red parts of the country from drawing some lines in the sand. I think things are likely getting close along the southern border.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ medaille said:
A civil war doesn’t make sense. The political difference boundaries aren’t at
the state level. In most states, it’s
more rural vs urban, so you have a dense pocket of blue surrounded by a sea of
red. I also don’t think the majority of team
red and team blue are that different in actuality. I think a civil war only makes sense if you
assume that all of members of each team are the crazy stereotypes the internet
tries to convince you are actually popular.
That said, I definitely think that the elites are trying to
split America into smaller, less powerful chunks that don’t have a Bill of
Rights.
i think the red/blue divide is pretty wide already and growing, I am sure it varies on where you are in the country, but rural America is losing its mind over the idiocy in DC and most blue states, I am sure those in the metro areas that vote blue think the same of the rural red states, but if the blue metro parts of the country continue to send the idiots to DC that they have been, that keep the country on the shit slide we are on, I dont see what is going to keep the red parts of the country from drawing some lines in the sand. I think things are likely getting close along the southern border.
I think you are misunderstanding what I’m saying. I’m saying that if you look at
Minnesota. We are a blue metro area and
a red not-metro area. You can’t have a civil
war, where our metro is in one nation which is linked up with Chicago, Seattle,
etc. and other blue areas and our rural area is in another because the blue areas are islands in a sea of red, so how would the islands connect together? Like-wise, I don’t think it makes sense to civil war on the state level, just because we’re “heavy” blue that it means we’re “all” blue. We’re like 52% blue and 45% red. You can’t civil war away the culture divide
when half your own state is the opposite culture.
That said, I do agree with what you said that the Washington
elite seem particularly uninterested in solving the border crisis. The willingness to let illegal immigrants in
while also not having an actual workable legal immigration process for these
people is very suspicious. I would argue
that one of the side effects they are going for with their illegal immigration
policy is civil war, but I think people would have to be very thoughtful in whether
civil war would actually be beneficial for anyone. They haven’t been successful at starting WW3,
but if they can get us to kill each other in a civil war, that would probably
be a good consolidation prize.
Quote: @medaille said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ medaille said:
A civil war doesn’t make sense. The political difference boundaries aren’t at
the state level. In most states, it’s
more rural vs urban, so you have a dense pocket of blue surrounded by a sea of
red. I also don’t think the majority of team
red and team blue are that different in actuality. I think a civil war only makes sense if you
assume that all of members of each team are the crazy stereotypes the internet
tries to convince you are actually popular.
That said, I definitely think that the elites are trying to
split America into smaller, less powerful chunks that don’t have a Bill of
Rights.
i think the red/blue divide is pretty wide already and growing, I am sure it varies on where you are in the country, but rural America is losing its mind over the idiocy in DC and most blue states, I am sure those in the metro areas that vote blue think the same of the rural red states, but if the blue metro parts of the country continue to send the idiots to DC that they have been, that keep the country on the shit slide we are on, I dont see what is going to keep the red parts of the country from drawing some lines in the sand. I think things are likely getting close along the southern border.
I think you are misunderstanding what I’m saying. I’m saying that if you look at
Minnesota. We are a blue metro area and
a red not-metro area. You can’t have a civil
war, where our metro is in one nation which is linked up with Chicago, Seattle,
etc. and other blue areas and our rural area is in another because the blue areas are islands in a sea of red, so how would the islands connect together? Like-wise, I don’t think it makes sense to civil war on the state level, just because we’re “heavy” blue that it means we’re “all” blue. We’re like 52% blue and 45% red. You can’t civil war away the culture divide
when half your own state is the opposite culture.
That said, I do agree with what you said that the Washington
elite seem particularly uninterested in solving the border crisis. The willingness to let illegal immigrants in
while also not having an actual workable legal immigration process for these
people is very suspicious. I would argue
that one of the side effects they are going for with their illegal immigration
policy is civil war, but I think people would have to be very thoughtful in whether
civil war would actually be beneficial for anyone. They haven’t been successful at starting WW3,
but if they can get us to kill each other in a civil war, that would probably
be a good consolidation prize.
Ive had plenty of rural minnesotas tell me that if there can be a Virginia and a West Virgina, no reason that there cant be a West Minnesota... I usually come back and say that there is a North and South Dakota, might as well have an East Dakota as well. :p
Quote: @medaille said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ medaille said:
A civil war doesn’t make sense. The political difference boundaries aren’t at
the state level. In most states, it’s
more rural vs urban, so you have a dense pocket of blue surrounded by a sea of
red. I also don’t think the majority of team
red and team blue are that different in actuality. I think a civil war only makes sense if you
assume that all of members of each team are the crazy stereotypes the internet
tries to convince you are actually popular.
That said, I definitely think that the elites are trying to
split America into smaller, less powerful chunks that don’t have a Bill of
Rights.
i think the red/blue divide is pretty wide already and growing, I am sure it varies on where you are in the country, but rural America is losing its mind over the idiocy in DC and most blue states, I am sure those in the metro areas that vote blue think the same of the rural red states, but if the blue metro parts of the country continue to send the idiots to DC that they have been, that keep the country on the shit slide we are on, I dont see what is going to keep the red parts of the country from drawing some lines in the sand. I think things are likely getting close along the southern border.
I think you are misunderstanding what I’m saying. I’m saying that if you look at
Minnesota. We are a blue metro area and
a red not-metro area. You can’t have a civil
war, where our metro is in one nation which is linked up with Chicago, Seattle,
etc. and other blue areas and our rural area is in another because the blue areas are islands in a sea of red, so how would the islands connect together? Like-wise, I don’t think it makes sense to civil war on the state level, just because we’re “heavy” blue that it means we’re “all” blue. We’re like 52% blue and 45% red. You can’t civil war away the culture divide
when half your own state is the opposite culture.
That said, I do agree with what you said that the Washington
elite seem particularly uninterested in solving the border crisis. The willingness to let illegal immigrants in
while also not having an actual workable legal immigration process for these
people is very suspicious. I would argue
that one of the side effects they are going for with their illegal immigration
policy is civil war, but I think people would have to be very thoughtful in whether
civil war would actually be beneficial for anyone. They haven’t been successful at starting WW3,
but if they can get us to kill each other in a civil war, that would probably
be a good consolidation prize.
This is exactly right for describing MN.
I suspect thats the case elsewhere, including Southern States. The blue metro is also where the bulk of the population is.
If memory serves me right, the Dems have won the popular Potus vote for some time now, but that hasn't always won them the white house.
20 years ago the Dems were the party of the farmer/rural areas. They've lost significant ground there over the decades.
I agree with many here that the Immigration and the border issues need to be dealt with more effectively.
Both sides are playing games i.e. redistricting mapping initiative etc.
So there is plenty of reasons for mis-trust to go around.
Quote: @AGRforever said:
You need an ID to buy spray paint but not to vote. Let that sink in.
No kidding. You even need an ID to buy groceries!
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
The good news is when the country fractures. I’m on the right half of the country. Godspeed northerns.
It won't split north and south, when it happens I see it being more by congressional districts, to borrow from texas parlance, gonna be some pissed off blueberries in the giant sea of red.
The urban areas will implode and the sea of red will unite.
Wisconsin voters just passed two referendums to prevent a repeat of the 2020 election. Zuckerberg provided financial assistance to assist in "curing" improperly submitted absentee ballots in the two large heavily Democratic Counties (Milwaukee, Dane/Madison). Despite State law stating that improperly completed ballots weren't to be counted, these two Counties had Zuckerberg backed private citizens cure the ballots in those two Counties only. It's estimated the number of cured ballots was around 30000. Biden margin of victory was just over 20,000. All the rural Counties didn't count the improper ballots as required by law.
The two referendums created Constitutional amendments to prevent privately funded election workers and to prevent elections officials from accepting private funds. Both passed and will be put into law prior to the 2024 election.
Quote: @badgervike said:
Wisconsin voters just passed two referendums to prevent a repeat of the 2020 election. Zuckerberg provided financial assistance to assist in "curing" improperly submitted absentee ballots in the two large heavily Democratic Counties (Milwaukee, Dane/Madison). Despite State law stating that improperly completed ballots weren't to be counted, these two Counties had Zuckerberg backed private citizens cure the ballots in those two Counties only. It's estimated the number of cured ballots was around 30000. Biden margin of victory was just over 20,000. All the rural Counties didn't count the improper ballots as required by law.
The two referendums created Constitutional amendments to prevent privately funded election workers and to prevent elections officials from accepting private funds. Both passed and will be put into law prior to the 2024 election.
but that election was on the up and up....
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ badgervike said:
Wisconsin voters just passed two referendums to prevent a repeat of the 2020 election. Zuckerberg provided financial assistance to assist in "curing" improperly submitted absentee ballots in the two large heavily Democratic Counties (Milwaukee, Dane/Madison). Despite State law stating that improperly completed ballots weren't to be counted, these two Counties had Zuckerberg backed private citizens cure the ballots in those two Counties only. It's estimated the number of cured ballots was around 30000. Biden margin of victory was just over 20,000. All the rural Counties didn't count the improper ballots as required by law.
The two referendums created Constitutional amendments to prevent privately funded election workers and to prevent elections officials from accepting private funds. Both passed and will be put into law prior to the 2024 election.
but that election was on the up and up....
And of all the things that were challenged in court who TF missed this? Is it significant, or does it mean anything other than rural cheesheads are convinced of another specious conspiracy.
|
