It's not a bad marriage. It's a few rwnjs who watched too much whining about transexuals and Hunter Biden.
You've not giving this any thought at all. The media tells you what to think and you think it.
The parties don't agree on anything at this point. Common ground has never been this hard to find and it's the "lwnjs" which have hijacked half of the political system.
I can list dozens of insane position that are now mainstream on the left.
Which positions the right holds are crazy?
You have to try and see from the other person’s perspective. I think in general the left views the right’s position on guns and abortion as crazy.
You've not giving this any thought at all. The media tells you what to think and you think it.
The parties don't agree on anything at this point. Common ground has never been this hard to find and it's the "lwnjs" which have hijacked half of the political system.
I can list dozens of insane position that are now mainstream on the left.
Which positions the right holds are crazy?
You have to try and see from the other person’s perspective. I think in general the left views the right’s position on guns and abortion as crazy.
The main issue is the left has zero exposure to the right's actual positions. The best they get is caricatures of the positions presented by heavily biased left wing media.
The republican position on guns was the Democrat position on guns not too long ago.
Republicans don't believe the answer to gun violence is taking away the rights of people who didn't break the law. You might not agree but it isn't "crazy".
As for abortion the crazy is firmly on the left. Even Europe bans abortion after 12 weeks and American liberals act like not being allowed to abort your baby at 9 months is Taliban style restriction. Both parties are far from the middle on abortion but the Democrats are much further away than than the Republicans.
During the late 1770's and early 1780's when the details were proposed and the arguments were ironed out for the US constitution one of the most difficult was how to balance the federal responsibilities vs those of the states. The eventual solution for providing stability for the new country was to keep local state controls intact out of respect for regional differences and delegate the broadest, mostly international duties to the federal government. The present administration has been sticking its nose into areas it was not originally designed for and is thus doing too much cross culture breeding which introduces conflict; needs to stop.
I didn't say anyone didn't have representation I said people don't like it when they don't and that this situation led directly to the Revolution and the Civil War.
The Civil War didn't break out over night it took decades to fester into violence.
There is very little common ground between the parties at this point and compromise is going to become harder and harder. Anyone who can't see the parallels is historically ignorant.
Alone in a Room wrote:
This is just ignorance
Alone in a Room wrote:
You have no idea what you are talking about
Yes, everyone who disagrees with you is stupid and brainwashed by the media. Very mature perspective!
So why bring up the fact that people who don't have representation don't like it if that's not the situation here? You just wanted to make an irrelevant point for the sake of it? Do you even have an argument or are you just trying to pick fights? The thread topic is about whether a "national divorce" can be done amicably, not whether there are parallells between the state of american politics today and 1860. If you are such a history buff, you should understand that a "national divorce" absolutely cannot be done in a peaceful manner. It is a disastrous idea and anyone advocating for it is either stupid or eager for bloodshed.
I wish we could send libs back to where they came from. My home state of Colorado has been invaded by libs fleeing the woke California policies who keep voting the same way. They ruin everywhere they go with their far left policies.
I wish we could send libs back to where they came from. My home state of Colorado has been invaded by libs fleeing the woke California policies who keep voting the same way. They ruin everywhere they go with their far left policies.
The main issue is the left has zero exposure to the right's actual positions. The best they get is caricatures of the positions presented by heavily biased left wing media.
It's incredible that you can say this with a straight face the day after the so-called "Clinton News Network" gave Trump a platform to rant about his insane "positions" for a full hour.
I do not think the US will split. The schism is ideological and only roughly geographic, with little continuity that would allow for two contiguous 'nations' to emerge. The far opposites (MAGAs and SJWs) who scream loudest and get the most attention are still fairly narrow slices of crusty waste at the ends of the big national loaf. The rest of us are in the middle, and while we don't much like either end, we have an interest in keep the bread unsliced. Sorry for the crumby metaphor.
There is no "roughly geographic" to a split at all. You cannot place a 51% red-49%blue state in a new red country (Trumplandia?).
You cannot carve out the blue cities from "red" states -- the red dirt areas would have be forced to carve up open spaces based on population going blue to going red.
It is a MA-GA wet-dream to take over all of the empty space in, for now, red voting areas for their own. But, that will never happen. MA-GA greed won't play.
One side will have a lot of trouble dealing with a shortage of people in the skilled trades and the other will suffer from a paucity of doctors, engineers, architects, computer scientists, etc. Never happen.
Care to guess which side will eat?
It won't be "your" side. What makes you thing redneck voters will tell non-redneck farmers who they are allowed will sell their crops to? Most farmers are owned by mega corporations. Is "your" side going to forcibly take over those farms so only "your" side can eat?
They both will eat. One side will export food and one side will import food.
Based on what? How a farmer owner voted in the last election? What is they changed parties, or didn't vote at all? I agree with the comments that it is idiotic to think a clean red-blue line can be drawn anywhere in the U.S.
The main issue is the left has zero exposure to the right's actual positions. The best they get is caricatures of the positions presented by heavily biased left wing media.
It's incredible that you can say this with a straight face the day after the so-called "Clinton News Network" gave Trump a platform to rant about his insane "positions" for a full hour.
The fact that you are outraged the front runner for the GoP got a townhall on CNN doesn't prove what you think it proves... lol.
I didn't say anyone didn't have representation I said people don't like it when they don't and that this situation led directly to the Revolution and the Civil War.
The Civil War didn't break out over night it took decades to fester into violence.
There is very little common ground between the parties at this point and compromise is going to become harder and harder. Anyone who can't see the parallels is historically ignorant.
Alone in a Room wrote:
This is just ignorance
Alone in a Room wrote:
You have no idea what you are talking about
Yes, everyone who disagrees with you is stupid and brainwashed by the media. Very mature perspective!
So why bring up the fact that people who don't have representation don't like it if that's not the situation here? You just wanted to make an irrelevant point for the sake of it? Do you even have an argument or are you just trying to pick fights? The thread topic is about whether a "national divorce" can be done amicably, not whether there are parallells between the state of american politics today and 1860. If you are such a history buff, you should understand that a "national divorce" absolutely cannot be done in a peaceful manner. It is a disastrous idea and anyone advocating for it is either stupid or eager for bloodshed.
You only think it's irrelevant because you're one of the stupid people...
The Civil War didn't start over night. It took decades to reach the boiling point. Lack of representation was the trigger. We are on a similar path right now whether you are bright enough to realize it or not. Nevada is literally trying to pass a bill that will negate the votes of it's own citizens in presidential elections.
The Civil War happened specifically because despite 80 years of effort to resolve differences amicably when the differences prove to be insurmountable conflict ALWAYS results.
Pointing out that it's likely to happen isn't "advocating" for it.
They both will eat. One side will export food and one side will import food.
Based on what? How a farmer owner voted in the last election? What is they changed parties, or didn't vote at all? I agree with the comments that it is idiotic to think a clean red-blue line can be drawn anywhere in the U.S.
They'll eat the way the rest of the world eats - trading resources. Countries import and export different varieties of food and other natural resources all the time. Yes it's silly to think a clean red-blue line can be drawn. In four years a few states will change from red to blue or blue to red anyway.
I wish we could send libs back to where they came from. My home state of Colorado has been invaded by libs fleeing the woke California policies who keep voting the same way. They ruin everywhere they go with their far left policies.
People have different views. Adults can live amongst this reality.
I wish we could send libs back to where they came from. My home state of Colorado has been invaded by libs fleeing the woke California policies who keep voting the same way. They ruin everywhere they go with their far left policies.
People have different views. Adults can live amongst this reality.
Then why do you try to silence or cancel any "adults" that don't agree with you?
Today the entire left is freaking out that CNN let a man that 75 million people voted for speak on their network.
Based on what? How a farmer owner voted in the last election? What is they changed parties, or didn't vote at all? I agree with the comments that it is idiotic to think a clean red-blue line can be drawn anywhere in the U.S.
They'll eat the way the rest of the world eats - trading resources. Countries import and export different varieties of food and other natural resources all the time. Yes it's silly to think a clean red-blue line can be drawn. In four years a few states will change from red to blue or blue to red anyway.
That won't work for M_A_G_As. Farms owned by corporations don't want the locals telling them who to sell to and who not to sell to. That is exactly what M_A_G_A politicians want to do. They will have to take over farmland based on how the owner voted in a recent election. Then they can control who eats and who starves.
The Adult will be a commanding general and then sec. of state for the new nation, while also doing the work of surgeon general and attorney general, all at the same time!
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.