How would the U.S. go about the process of splitting in two?

[Anonymous]

I am sure there is more than democrats and republicans in this big country. Right now we are represented by either via location, 3 rd party would never win enough local votes to get a seat in the congress. I would like to see a parliament system where we have representation by % of population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am sure there is more than democrats and republicans in this big country. Right now we are represented by either via location, 3 rd party would never win enough local votes to get a seat in the congress. I would like to see a parliament system where we have representation by % of population.

Don't forget we have an Independent in the Senate, and even a Socialist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP asked a rather interesting legal/procedural question and we responded with our usual mud-flinging diatribes.

How about me answering a question with a question: How might we go about reuniting our country's two hostile tribes -- liberals and conservative? I'm not speaking of erasing philosophical differences, just learning how to treat each other like fellow Americans who have different ideas about how to reach common goals.

Except that it's really not. The second response pretty well laid out the procedure- it's actually pretty simple - and identified several of the myriad reasons why it will not happen. So it ceases to become interesting, and becomes navel gazing.

Interest is subjective and a question does not automatically and retroactively become uninteresting because someone answers it. However, I'm glad you pointed me back to Freeman's early response, because I don't know where in the Constitution the question of secession is addressed. Did Lincoln have Constitutional grounds to keep the Union together? If not, has it been amended in?

Anyhow, that offhand reference to the "interesting" question was just a polite intro to my main point that I would like to see schoolyard level nastiness removed from political discussion (which probably has less chance of happening that the splitting we are supposedly discussing.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP asked a rather interesting legal/procedural question and we responded with our usual mud-flinging diatribes.

How about me answering a question with a question: How might we go about reuniting our country's two hostile tribes -- liberals and conservative? I'm not speaking of erasing philosophical differences, just learning how to treat each other like fellow Americans who have different ideas about how to reach common goals.

Except that it's really not. The second response pretty well laid out the procedure- it's actually pretty simple - and identified several of the myriad reasons why it will not happen. So it ceases to become interesting, and becomes navel gazing.

Interest is subjective and a question does not automatically and retroactively become uninteresting because someone answers it. However, I'm glad you pointed me back to Freeman's early response, because I don't know where in the Constitution the question of secession is addressed. Did Lincoln have Constitutional grounds to keep the Union together? If not, has it been amended in?

Anyhow, that offhand reference to the "interesting" question was just a polite intro to my main point that I would like to see schoolyard level nastiness removed from political discussion (which probably has less chance of happening that the splitting we are supposedly discussing.)

agree, but the moderator sorta sets the tone around here. he gives cover for the rest.

[Anonymous]

If the Lib America has to give up the South. Just think of the political leadership lost.. A dream team would be turned over to run the Conseranut South America : Rich Scott. Hailey Barber (fmr), Rick Perry, jan Brewer, Bobby Jindal & Robt.

Food stamps would bebreplaced with vouchers for Chick Fil A or McDonald's. I can see waist lines expanding, education plummeting, church attendance becoming mandatory, legitimate rape becoming legitimized, death penality for providing an abortion, healthcare available to those who can pay cash for service.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you remember the map that circulated a while after GWB was re-elected? The north + ne+ west coast became part of Canada and the rest became Jesusland? (Funny though offensive to genuine Christians.)

On a serious note, wouldn't the process be akin to what other countries have experienced? Czechoslovakia, the Koreas?

Presumably OP would prefer a peaceful separation, not one preceded by war.

I would actually love to see a real experiment--let's pick a few states where the Extreme Conservative agenda could be carried out for a limited time (like 3-5 years) to see whether their ideas could work. No abortion or birth control, low tax rates for the wealthy, no regulation of any industry, drill as much as you like...

Yep, and the northern states like Illinois, Connecticut, NJ, NY, and RI can go bankrupt. Sry, but the utter snobbery of this thread is offensive.

There seems to be a huge number of people in the US who buy into the conservative agenda. So why not try to carry that agenda out in full? It would be for a limited time, that "country" would be on friendly relations with the larger part and be able to trade, etc. It's just a question of seeing whether those super conservative ideas (socially and fiscally) can actually work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd LOVE to be separated from the Bible Belt south!

No problem since you are going to HELL anyway.

Will we be able to deport those who damn others to HELL?

[Anonymous]

there must be away to do this. It not like anyone would fight the South leaving now. We would help them!

[Anonymous]

What would you do with Virginia? West Virginia split from VA in the Civil War. NOVA would be North Virginia and the rest South Virginia? Fairfax, Loudoun, and Arlington become East Virginia? Does the North keep Dulles Airport and the Leesburg outlet mall?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'd take the SC manufacturing resurgence any day. God bless Right to Work states. Enjoy your grapes and soybeans.

Yeah, I'm sure the SC are going to love those tobacco dinners. Yum.

[Anonymous]

This is interesting. Why would a state getting independence be such a bad thing?
If some state wants to do it, why not?
Quebec has been planning to become independent, but have not recieved enough votes for it in order to descide to do it.
Scotland wants to get rid of English rule. We cannot blame them as we ourselves were the first to do so.
Soviet Union broke up into independent republics.

One day Falkland Islands will want to be independent.
What is so wrong with the idea of some state us state doing to same

[Anonymous]

Is it just me who finds it funny that the US who pushes democracy on other countries, is full of people pretty much advocating a one-party system? Learn to love diversity of opinion because that is how democracy works...

It is not healthy to have a system where one party dominates. FYI.