MFW SECESSION

remember it's not the states that want to secede, just people in the states.

are you serious? I can't take this whole thing seriously just because of that

Bandwagon?

Because it was so close that it felt 50/50. Enough people disliked Obama as a president, especially with the new taxes being placed. There were multiple businesses that were sending out emails to their employees saying that if Obama gets re-elected, they will no longer be able to afford keeping X number of people at their company.

You say that enough people disliked Obama, but then you say people were forced to vote against Obama? Wouldn't that mean that there is actually more support for Obama than the what the popular vote showed? Also, the new taxes being place are bipartisan, but mostly being pushed by the GOP. Around 60% of Americans wanted taxes to increase, for either the rich or everyone. Also, before you call me an ideologue, know that I dislike Obama. His compromise with the Republicans is going to a do a load of harm to the middle class and below. It would actually be better if he did nothing at all, considering how the Bush tax cuts are going expire soon.

The vote count was rigged. In one county in Ohio, Obama got 108% of the possible vote. I think other counties had insane numbers too.

http://www. sodahead . com/united-states/bho-won-wood-county-ohio108-of-vote-and-21-districts-with-100- of-votejust-an-innocent-occur/question-3313911/

By the way, they found major evidence of voting fraud, which everyone knows has been a huge problem in a lot of modern elections.

Voter fraud isn't a big issue; only around 2,000 cases. Also, it was exaggerated by the GOP so they could enforce voter ID laws. This was so minorities, old people, etc, would not be able to vote-- they tend to vote for Democrats.

That's a nice opinion and all, but could i see your papers before you speak?

That's not a big thing to ask for. Nobody who can't tell me the President, Vice-President, and Speaker of the House should not vote. It is NOT a God given right to vote. This does NOT violate freedom of speach.

1) My grammar is terrible? Okay?
2) How is this attacking people at a disadvantage exactly? Are you saying that people who don't know who the current 3 largest people in the government are (out of a MC) should be given a say in how this country is run? Is it so much to ask that people who vote, know what the Hell they are voting for? No. It's not.

No it didn't. Obama won both the electoral college and the popular vote. Obama won the popular vote by 3.5 million. Please check your facts.

there was a brief moment before all the votes were in where romney was ahead in the popular vote but obama was ahead in the electoral.
it was brief and several states had still not been counted fully
people went ape shit and started spreading that around the moment they noticed it even though there were hours left until the official results

no he won both votes but you are at least true in saying the electoral college is dumb we would have had al gore instead of bush.....damn

haha good call

if oklahoma were to leave we have oil, farm animals, and grain
not to forget we also have grain
but we are not even going to try because we may be dumbasses but we are not that big of ones

Several of them in fact do. Texas as a prime example.

But a lot of the states that think they have the resources get huge government subsidies to afford to use them (oil, obviously, but even agriculture). Leave the US, lose the money to afford the resources. Not to mention all the national military personnel and equipment.

Implying citizens in especially those lower states couldnt throw up a hell of a defense protecting their homes. Short of Airstrikes, which I think the US would not allow as they would be so close to their own border.

Pretty sure several of the states, could be self sufficient. Note most probably could not, but some of them might be able to be. Others might be able to get enough from tourism or other factors as well as their own agriculture.

And money. That will depend on how the secession happens, if they say fuck your debt or agree to pay a share of it. Its beyond my knowledge level to comment any further on this part

Americans would never fire on Americans in that situation. Its different to the civil war now, people have a national identity as opposed to a state identity.

I meant other countries invading. If some states do secede, which the US kinda has to allow if it does happen, there would be no point then for them to war the new 'country'.

If the US wanted to start bombing and shit, I doubt any citizenry militia would last long.

No country would invade Texas, no country has any remote interest or navy specialized in amphibious invasions. Texas has nothing worth having (it will run out of oil soon)

US doesn't have to allow anything. Worst comes to the worst, the US would have a vote in Texas for the whole population to vote on Independence, which most likely would end up with an autonomous Texas. (But not sovereign.) War would only happen if Texas decided to seize all the US military hardware and infrastructure and refuse to pay their national share of the debt. Which even then, would be as quick as it took the US to move across the border. (If texas was on the verge of leaving, we can assume the US would place military forces on the state border)

Texas doesn't, we have some resources, but no army, we would lose are "no debt" law to build one and maintain the "country" but would die out fast.

Pretty sure I saw somewhere they were saying Texas could thrive, given they were not invaded. And truth be told, I doubt anyone from across the sea would, cause it would make the USA thats left nervous, having enemies so close.

If all those countries in the South seceded, and became a union, they could easily maintain their own, and prosper. Also, Texas alone has all the resources to live on it's own. And when they were admitted to the U.S. it was on the condition they could maintain their own navy (which they use for border patrol now) and that they could peacefully sucede at any time.

after the civil war, they gave up the right to secede at any time.

Really? How sad.

No.... no they couldn't. Hell, North America couldn't sustain itself as a whole. We need trading with other countries.

Yes it can. We choose not too. Also, needs for imports do not classify a country as non-self-sufficient.

No, it cannot. The united states has a very large lack of natural resources, and has to trade for most of the goods it receives. If the south split of, then we would be placing large tariffs on each other and competing more and more for the remaining resources.

Do you know what you are talking about? The United States has more oil than the rest of the world, the United States has ample amounts of raw material, we export large amounts of agriculture products (because we have so much farmland), and we are entirely capable of industrialization. We make up almost an entire continent, and one of the most fertile continents to boot, do you not realize that? The South contains the majority of these resources, as well. The only reason we don't take advantage of them, is because of stupid fucking politics. And if the South seceded, tariffs wouldn't be placed because they have been proven to damage the economy of those enforcing the tariff quite a bit.

Just saying, the US does not make up 'Almost an entire continent', let alone even half of the continent. Also, I don't believe the US has more oil than the rest of the world. Seeing as that would be damn near impossible for 51% of the planets oil reserves to be within US borders.
No offence, but you should try to not exaggerate your 'facts'.

1)
North America: 9.54 million square miles
United States: 3.79 million square miles
Sorry, I've never bothered wasting my time doing the math, but I was making a general assumption. I underestimated the size of Canada greatly.
Source: Wiki
2) "A recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office estimate that if half of the oil bound up in the rock of the Green River Formation could be recovered it would be "equal to the entire world's proven oil reserves.""(abcnews.go.com/Business/american-oil-find-holds-oil-opec/story?id=17536852#.UKXJytHpvNA)
I'm sorry, but maybe you should bother clicking the first link on Google before you go spouting your mouth off.

Also, nice job ignoring everything else, and simply attacking the one thing I got wrong because of a simply misunderstanding of Canada's size, and another thing which was completely right and has been known for years.

I was not be disrespectful, so I don't see why you had to be. Second, it is an 'estimated' amount of oil. And estimations aren't always right. But, say that there is that much oil there, how do you know there isn't another huge oil deposit like that? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that article saying that it would amount to more than the current oil reserves?
I never used the word current, I simply said 'Seeing as that would be damn near impossible for 51% of the planets oil reserves to be within US borders'. Now, thinking about the size of the rest of the world compared to the US, would it not make sense 'statistically' that there could not be that much oil there?
Again, your fact only takes into account known oil amounts. There is probably still a TON of oil elsewhere in the world, such as under sea, but it hasn't been discovered yet.
Now, I was not commenting on your post to attack or berate you, but to just correct the facts you had stated prior. You don't you have to get all bent out about it.

And if you want to talk about successful countries without virtually any natural resources, look at Japan. They are a processing country. They import raw materials, and export the completed products.

Texas would be the world's 15th biggest economy

Some people think because the state is doing good that they can be a country, or that they have many airforce/army bases that they have an army. The bases would pack up and leave if a state seceded and that state would be on U.S.A.'s shit list.

But theres still enough butthurt repuplicans to sign a petition.

Doesn't mean they don't want to be stuck with the ones who did.

Didn't*

fukken saved

Michigan as well

The people vote to tell the electoral college who to vote for.

More than 50% of the people in each state voted for Obama, so yes, those states did vote for him.

Sorry, had my numbers wrong. We have a good 36 million people in California. Now if a large majority popped up with this petition then we'd be getting a glare from the president.

Indeed very splendid.

But the time before that it worked out very well

I just took this cereal!

I've poisoned the cereal.

My cereal!

Jokes on you, I'm emo!

I just took this serious!

Lets ignore your idiotic comment about how you think a state could take on a whole country, because put simply, that's pants-on-head retarded. A bunch of rednecks with shotguns against a trained millitary.

To the next point, I was making a joke and you took it seriously. Fuck off.

Final point, Texas would most likely be anally destroyed by the other states they're going against, otherwise known as, the smart part of USA that ISNT trying to break away from it.

To be fair, he has a point because Canada has a population that is 1/10 of ours, they simply can't be a large military power.

Also, 1 out of every 15 military servicemen are Texan, so I wouldn't say that Texas would get its ass whooped right off the bat.

Secession is still a stupid idea.

Yea its not like they don't have 3 major Forts, one of which is the main Army Medical Fort, nor Corpus Christi, the Navy Training site. Not to mention all the gun loves who shoot tactically, which is why Texas is home to the largest tactical shooting establishment for civilians, known as Thunder Ranch. They aren't rednecks with shotguns, they are armed civilians. You underestimate Texas a great deal.

You seem to think it could take on a whole fuckin' country.
Pants-on-head retarded.
"Underestimate texas"
You're the one whos got their 'murica beer goggles on, believing that Canada has no millitary power.

But if Las Vegas seceded, what would we call it?

lost vegas

sore losers

Like when Nixon was impeached. Both sides always do this.

New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and Oregon have voted Democratic almost every single election. So no.

actually much of the surplus clinton created was created in a way doomed to failure from the start, the political equivalent of selling your car for gas money.
bush could have maintained the surplus with a lot of work, but he ended up making the already existing problems even worse, the political equivalent of setting a sinking ship on fire.
obama inherited the fallout from both of these, along with a heavily conservative congress that practically behaved like children throwing a tantrum and did exactly the opposite of anything he wanted to do. even if he could have plugged the leak and put out the fire, there was a team of people bailing the water away from the flames but not out of the boat.

but yes, i do agree, conservatives have a tendency to react far more radically when they don't get their way. since most of them are loud and proud christians, it's all fire and brimstone whenever anything doesn't go exactly according to what they believe to be gods will.

conservatism as the name implies is about conserving things, not resources mind you, but maintaining the current course and not making change. liberals seek change, so by that very nature when a conservative loses, it's not likely that the old way could ever return, it has been lost for good, another part of their way of life has been chipped away. if a liberal loses, they have only failed to make a change and they are free to try again with a new tactic.

personally i think we should have obeyed the will of the founding fathers and never established a bipartisanship in the first place because it's absurd to believe that political views can be narrowed down to two convenient little boxes, some things should be preserved and other things should be changed, we should never forsake progress for tradition and never forsake stability for change

The surplus under Clinton was created by Federal Reserve money lending when they inflated the tech bubble. The Fed gave cheap new money to give to banks who turned around and bought into tech companies and as long as the Fed kept creating money everything went fine, but it can't go on forever.. In other words the tech bubble was profitable only because of how quickly the money entered into it straight from the Federal Reserve balance sheet when compared to other sectors of the economy.

Also maybe you should think about becoming pro-secession if you aren't already because if it is absurd to have people to choose between only two viewpoints, it must be even more absurd to force them to live under one (I mean whatever prevailing laws are at the moment, NOT the president). If a state doesn't want to settle for current laws and thinks it could make improvements, even if it is only one minor change, then it would be advantageous for it to do so and if the change is successful others will follow the example because they also want to succeed and society would benefit as a whole.