If Trump Wins and the Senate stays red?

[jimmyjazz 46219]

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Just because secession once kicked off a violent civil war doesn’t mean it would now. If California wants to leave so wish them luck. If the shoe was on the other foot I expect somewhat the same. 
I don’t see anyone with the stomach to fight over succession again. It’s a counter factual and I might well be wrong, but just because 160 year ago it led to war doesn’t mean it needed to then or necessarily would now. 

There is absolutely no way 49 states would roll over for California taking a huge percentage of the US tech industry and walking away.  I mean, it's absurd.

[jimmyjazz 46219]

9 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I saw someone wrote something non March of 2020 that called the Rona “the first crisis, not of his own making, of the Trump presidency”. I thought that was pretty appropriate. 

I'm not sure what you're saying here -- is "non" supposed to be "in"?
 

Regardless, Trump most definitely owns the SCALE of the crisis.  He fucked it up six ways from Sunday.

[RPM 26359]

4 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Just because secession once kicked off a violent civil war doesn’t mean it would now. If California wants to leave so wish them luck. If the shoe was on the other foot I expect somewhat the same. 
I don’t see anyone with the stomach to fight over succession again. It’s a counter factual and I might well be wrong, but just because 160 year ago it led to war doesn’t mean it needed to then or necessarily would now. 

A lone state, even California, couldn't pull it off. They would need a coalition of Western states to join them. The Colorado River and Rocky Mountains are a powerful resource.

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

8 hours ago, BradInATX said:

There's not going to be civil war or secession.

There is a very real chance that a re-election would push the world to switch from USD to something else as the global reserve currency and petro dollar, though. And that would be catastrophic to the point where it could mean the end of American prosperity.

That’s a bit of an overstatement but yeah losing reserve currency status would be bad. 
it can’t mean an end to prosperity when we still have so much natural resources, military might and intellectual capital, but it

would not be great. 

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

There is absolutely no way 49 states would roll over for California taking a huge percentage of the US tech industry and walking away.  I mean, it's absurd.

You will have the entire SEC footprint dance a jig. If California took Oregon and Washington with them that leaves 80 electoral votes that will always be blue off the table. That makes the senate permanently red. That makes the Acela corridor the only actual liberal place in America. Trust me when I tell you, the SEC ain’t gonna fight to keep them in the conference. 

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm not sure what you're saying here -- is "non" supposed to be "in"?
 

Regardless, Trump most definitely owns the SCALE of the crisis.  He fucked it up six ways from Sunday.

Yes. Meaning every other crisis that trump had to face, before the Rona, was of his own creation. I think that’s entirely accurate. He’s a clown. 

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

5 hours ago, ndawg said:

Blue states need to start leveraging their superior intellect. Here’s how you make a peaceful breakup happen:

”Hey red states. Y’all tired of our socialism being a drag on our shared resources? How about we go our separate ways. If you’re right, we’ll be Venezuela in a few years, crumbling under the weight of our impractical social programs and you’ll be rich thanks to not having to carry us on your back anymore. Why not stand by your beliefs? You’re not scared, are you?”

The entire time the south will be cackling- don’t throw us in the briar patch. 

[SydneyCarton 48201]

11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

There is absolutely no way 49 states would roll over for California taking a huge percentage of the US tech industry and walking away.  I mean, it's absurd.

 

9 minutes ago, RPM said:

A lone state, even California, couldn't pull it off. They would need a coalition of Western states to join them. The Colorado River and Rocky Mountains are a powerful resource.

Why are you even arguing with him? Even if his reputation didn't precede him, which it most certainly does, you get this gem to just cement the point home further:

6 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

That’s a bit of an overstatement but yeah losing reserve currency status would be bad. 
it can’t mean an end to prosperity when we still have so much natural resources, military might and intellectual capital, but it

would not be great. 

Reasonable adults know that a state can't just secede and folks are going to shrug their shoulders and say "cool, you do you." The federal resources that are located in specific places, for starters. Like, say, the strategic oil reserve in Texas. Texas just doesn't get to keep that. But I bet they sure aren't going to give it up. You think the White House is going to fucking dig up NORAD and transport it bodily to somewhere else, like Ohio? Then let him examine all the working pieces of the United States power grid. You'll be shocked that Wulaw, a man on this site who has repeatedly demonstrated an understanding of nuance on par a toddler, probably hasn't given much thought that while there's tens of thousands of power stations and 48 contiguous states, there's really just 3 main pieces that interconnect into The Grid. I'm sure he has a really easy explanation for what happens when a state right in the middle says "peace out." Maybe he can imagine an 18 wheeler if a row of tires and and axle disappear into thin air. But yeah, no one would use military intervention to ensure that their power supply to the rest of the country remains reliable and unobstructed. 

And that doesn't even address the nuance as JimmyJazz and others alluded to about Tech assets. What about the property of corporations that span multiple states. New Contracts negotiated, new terms, or confiscated property? 

Let me put it this way. War would be way, way less complicated. Considering this country full of idiotic lucksticks with low IQs and bellicose tendencies can't even sit down and pass legislation that is overwhelmingly bi-partisan, I really like the odds of cool heads making this work. Why don't you multiple Brexit by about 50. Also, Wulaw should ask the UK how well Brexit has gone for them.  

[RPM 26359]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Why are you even arguing with him?

Not arguing, just making a logical point.

[Dbeasy 15094]

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

 

Why are you even arguing with him? Even if his reputation didn't precede him, which it most certainly does, you get this gem to just cement the point home further:

Reasonable adults know that a state can't just secede and folks are going to shrug their shoulders and say "cool, you do you." The federal resources that are located in specific places, for starters. Like, say, the strategic oil reserve in Texas. Texas just doesn't get to keep that. But I bet they sure aren't going to give it up. You think the White House is going to fucking dig up NORAD and transport it bodily to somewhere else, like Ohio? Then let him examine all the working pieces of the United States power grid. You'll be shocked that Wulaw, a man on this site who has repeatedly demonstrated an understanding of nuance on par a toddler, probably hasn't given much thought that while there's tens of thousands of power stations and 48 contiguous states, there's really just 3 main pieces that interconnect into The Grid. I'm sure he has a really easy explanation for what happens when a state right in the middle says "peace out." Maybe he can imagine an 18 wheeler if a row of tires and and axle disappear into thin air. But yeah, no one would use military intervention to ensure that their power supply to the rest of the country remains reliable and unobstructed. 

And that doesn't even address the nuance as JimmyJazz and others alluded to about Tech assets. What about the property of corporations that span multiple states. New Contracts negotiated, new terms, or confiscated property? 

Let me put it this way. War would be way, way less complicated. Considering this country full of idiotic lucksticks with low IQs and bellicose tendencies can't even sit down and pass legislation that is overwhelmingly bi-partisan, I really like the odds of cool heads making this work. Why don't you multiple Brexit by about 50. Also, Wulaw should ask the UK how well Brexit has gone for them.  

Would you sign up to fight to keep California in the Union?  Would you send your kids to die to make that happen?  Would other people?

this whole thing is an absurd counter factual that is incredibly incredibly incredibly unlikely to ever happen,  but I don’t think it’s absurd to say that the SEC and Great Plains states would have no desire to spill blood to keep the west coast in the Union. 
Its the most fervently expresses desire of most every redneck in the confederacy to be free of California, and now they are going to sign up to fight and die to keep them in the Union?  Maybe? But I don’t think it’s written in stone that would be the response. Brexit happened (is happening?) (might happen?). Yugoslavia broke up. The USSR broke up. 
I don’t think it’s a given that the United States, in its current form, is destined to remain a unified country forever, but I also think it’s exceedingly unlikely that it fractured any time soon (forever is a long time- that’s all I’m saying)

The entire history of the world is change, that’s literally the only constant around. Maybe that’s just toddler level sophistication though- the ability to step back and say- we don’t know what the future holds and nobody has any clue how everything would shake out once dominoes start falling. 
but really, enjoy yourself arguing with a straw man I literally never said when you “respond” to my post. 

[jimmyjazz 46219]

Joe Muffler doesn't make the decision.  The US Congress and the Executive branch do.  The financial implications alone would be massive, and it just isn't going to happen.

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

18 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

 

Why are you even arguing with him? Even if his reputation didn't precede him, which it most certainly does, you get this gem to just cement the point home further:

Reasonable adults know that a state can't just secede and folks are going to shrug their shoulders and say "cool, you do you." The federal resources that are located in specific places, for starters. Like, say, the strategic oil reserve in Texas. Texas just doesn't get to keep that. But I bet they sure aren't going to give it up. You think the White House is going to fucking dig up NORAD and transport it bodily to somewhere else, like Ohio? Then let him examine all the working pieces of the United States power grid. You'll be shocked that Wulaw, a man on this site who has repeatedly demonstrated an understanding of nuance on par a toddler, probably hasn't given much thought that while there's tens of thousands of power stations and 48 contiguous states, there's really just 3 main pieces that interconnect into The Grid. I'm sure he has a really easy explanation for what happens when a state right in the middle says "peace out." Maybe he can imagine an 18 wheeler if a row of tires and and axle disappear into thin air. But yeah, no one would use military intervention to ensure that their power supply to the rest of the country remains reliable and unobstructed. 

And that doesn't even address the nuance as JimmyJazz and others alluded to about Tech assets. What about the property of corporations that span multiple states. New Contracts negotiated, new terms, or confiscated property? 

Let me put it this way. War would be way, way less complicated. Considering this country full of idiotic lucksticks with low IQs and bellicose tendencies can't even sit down and pass legislation that is overwhelmingly bi-partisan, I really like the odds of cool heads making this work. Why don't you multiple Brexit by about 50. Also, Wulaw should ask the UK how well Brexit has gone for them.  

Seriously man- this is a bizarre rant. Go reread what I wrote. I said “it’s not a given that succession would lead to civil war, I might be wrong but nobody can know what would happen for sure” and I said that I believe hat the SEC states would have no problem waving goodbye to the West Coast. What the fuck do you think you are arguing with me about?

If your wife asked for a divorce would you bring her back to the marital bed with a gun to her head?  I didn’t say this was going to happen, I didn’t say that it should happen (that’s FondrenRoad) I didn’t say it would be easy if it did happen. I literally said “I’m not completely sure that CA leaving the Union (and I Didn’t even say it would be likely that they’d do it themselves as I said I’d have to imagine the rest of the west coast joining them!) would automatically result in civil war. 
shit man, shake yourself.  That’s just a really really really bad job of reading comprehension by you. 
And the post of mine you actually quoted was literally me saying- losing reserve currency status would be really bad for us- but we’d still have other things going for us that would enable us to succeed in this world. That is quite a controversial point. I totally understand how that leads to name calling. 
 

[SydneyCarton 48201]

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Would you sign up to fight to keep California in the Union?  Would you send your kids to die to make that happen?  Would other people?

this whole thing is an absurd counter factual that is incredibly incredibly incredibly unlikely to ever happen,  but I don’t think it’s absurd to say that the SEC and Great Plains states would have no desire to spill blood to keep the west coast in the Union. 
Its the most fervently expresses desire of most every redneck in the confederacy to be free of California, and now they are going to sign up to fight and die to keep them in the Union?  Maybe? But I don’t think it’s written in stone that would be the response. Brexit happened (is happening?) (might happen?). Yugoslavia broke up. The USSR broke up. 
I don’t think it’s a given that the United States, in its current form, is destined to remain a unified country forever, but I also think it’s exceedingly unlikely that it fractured any time soon (forever is a long time- that’s all I’m saying)

The entire history of the world is change, that’s literally the only constant around. Maybe that’s just toddler level sophistication though- the ability to step back and say- we don’t know what the future holds and nobody has any clue how everything would shake out once dominoes start falling. 
but really, enjoy yourself arguing with a straw man I literally never said when you “respond” to my post. 

The US already has a standing army of 250k people. I don't think they need to implement a fucking draft. What they can do is try some folks for desertion or failing to follow orders and see how many fall in line after that. 

So, you can't really respond to any of my points or illustrations with any thought. You just went "Listen, I don't think  ____________ is willing to _____________ to keep ______________. I would say that is...well, showing the nuance of a toddler.

The USSR broke up after an economic collapse, which isn't what is being debated or illustrated here. Additionally, many of those were existing countries with their own history before joining the USSR. That's hardly the same dynamic as a country made up of "states," but the states literally never existing in any form until being settled and formed and adopted by the United States (while I'm sure native americans would disagree, but I think people understand my point). Georiga wasn't a state full of Georgians for hundreds of years before becoming a state of the United States. US prisoners and settlers went to that land and settled it. It's not like Czechoslovakia breaking off of the Austro-Hungrian empire, existing on its own, then being absorbed, joining by the USSR, then going back to being it's own country. You know. Nuance. 

Now, would Puerto Rico or even Hawaii head their own way? Sure, completely different conversation. 

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Joe Muffler doesn't make the decision.  The US Congress and the Executive branch do.  The financial implications alone would be massive, and it just isn't going to happen.

Oh I agree completely that it’s incredibly unlikely to happen. It’s a counter factual so it’s all mental masterbation. I’m literally positing merely that there’s be a large coalition in the group of states “left behind” that would benefit from the new arrangement and because of that a civil war is not inevitable. 

[SydneyCarton 48201]

2 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Seriously man- this is a bizarre rant. Go reread what I wrote. I said “it’s not a given that succession would lead to civil war, I might be wrong but nobody can know what would happen for sure” and I said that I believe hat the SEC states would have no problem waving goodbye to the West Coast. What the fuck do you think you are arguing with me about?

If your wife asked for a divorce would you bring her back to the marital bed with a gun to her head?  I didn’t say this was going to happen, I didn’t say that it should happen (that’s FondrenRoad) I didn’t say it would be easy if it did happen. I literally said “I’m not completely sure that CA leaving the Union (and I Didn’t even say it would be likely that they’d do it themselves as I said I’d have to imagine the rest of the west coast joining them!) would automatically result in civil war. 
shit man, shake yourself.  That’s just a really really really bad job of reading comprehension by you. 
And the post of mine you actually quoted was literally me saying- losing reserve currency status would be really bad for us- but we’d still have other things going for us that would enable us to succeed in this world. That is quite a controversial point. I totally understand how that leads to name calling. 
 

I'm laughing at the point you've attempted to make several times, secession wouldn't result in some form of military intervention and folks could go their own way. As Jimmy has said, it's not up to Joe Six Pack. Many of those fuckers don't care if cops keep shooting black people. Of course, that's not really the fucking point because that's not how things work. You entertaining the idea that it's possible things COULD play out as you suggest is patently absurd.

That being said, I was entreating other posters to not engage with you on this fucking lunacy, and look at the fucking vomit I've spewed all over this thread, so fuck me for being a piece of shit. 

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

The US already has a standing army of 250k people. I don't think they need to implement a fucking draft. What they can do is try some folks for desertion or failing to follow orders and see how many fall in line after that. 

So, you can't really respond to any of my points or illustrations with any thought. You just went "Listen, I don't think  ____________ is willing to _____________ to keep ______________. I would say that is...well, showing the nuance of a toddler.

The USSR broke up after an economic collapse, which isn't what is being debated or illustrated here. Additionally, many of those were existing countries with their own history before joining the USSR. That's hardly the same dynamic as a country made up of "states," but the states literally never existing in any form until being settled and formed and adopted by the United States (while I'm sure native americans would disagree, but I think people understand my point). Georiga wasn't a state full of Georgians for hundreds of years before becoming a state of the United States. US prisoners and settlers went to that land and settled it. It's not like Czechoslovakia breaking off of the Austro-Hungrian empire, existing on its own, then being absorbed, joining by the USSR, then going back to being it's own country. You know. Nuance. 

Now, would Puerto Rico or even Hawaii head their own way? Sure, completely different conversation. 

 I’m not responding to anything you said because it’s abject nonsense that has nothing to do with what I said. It’s literally terrible reading comprehension that’s not germane to anything I wrote before you chimed in like a clown- firing off non sequesters at me that have nothing to do with what I wrote preceding it. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

5 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

That's hardly the same dynamic as a country made up of "states," but the states literally never existing in any form until being settled and formed and adopted by the United States

Interesting, so you can't think of a single state among the contiguous states that existed in any form until being settled and adopted by the United States?  Not a single one?  On this message board.

[SydneyCarton 48201]

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

Interesting, so you can't think of a single state among the contiguous states that existed in any form until being settled and adopted by the United States?  Not a single one?  On this message board.

Hey fucktard, you don't think me listing Hawaii or Puerto Rico in the same fucking post illustrates that I do understand that concept? You're digging pretty deep to try and take a post shot.

Guess what, Texas is also one of the 3 areas that's it's own chunk of the US power grid I referenced earlier. But you know, it's a conversation covering MOST of America, not a few exceptions. 

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

17 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Joe Muffler doesn't make the decision.  The US Congress and the Executive branch do.  The financial implications alone would be massive, and it just isn't going to happen.

Thought experiment- 

Mitch McConnell is presented with the west coast (and let’s throw Nevada in since it’s contiguous) leaving the United States- ensuring that congress is red well into the future and he’s majority leader for life. 
Is he going to order civil war to stop this from happening?  Would he rather be majority leader of most of the United States that are left or face a minority leader position in 2022?  How about other GOP Pols that would like to be president someday. Would they like to lose 80ish electoral votes that are guaranteed to be against them?   
They just kissed the ring of a fool and asshole and made him dictator of the party because it allowed them to keep some personal power for themselves, and I’m supposed to think that presented with a solution that would consolidate their hold on power indefinitely that its 100% certain that they would wage a civil war to keep that group in the country, that group electorally aligned against them that wants nothing more than their defeat? 
maybe. I’m not going to bet my life on that though. 

Edited August 26, 2020 by Wulaw Horn

[NameAlreadyInUse 5129]

23 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

 

all that said, do you think the united states will exist in its current form in 2000 years?  1000?  500?  if you answered emphatic yes to those questions, then disregard the rest of this paragraph.  if you hesitated or answered no, then ask yourself this - what happened?  because something surely did happen, and surely will happen.  technology has gotten us to the point where borders really don't matter anymore. 

If only I had the time this week to really sit down and think this through and type out a thorough response.  This is a really great discussion point, and since I don't have the time this week, I'm responding to keep it alive that hopefully a conversation around this can start and last long enough that when I do take some time on Saturday it'll still be an active discussion.  Here's hoping.  

[jimmyjazz 46219]

I really wish I hadn't started this thread.

I should know better.

Delete user, ban thread.

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

3 hours ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

If only I had the time this week to really sit down and think this through and type out a thorough response.  This is a really great discussion point, and since I don't have the time this week, I'm responding to keep it alive that hopefully a conversation around this can start and last long enough that when I do take some time on Saturday it'll still be an active discussion.  Here's hoping.  

It is an interesting question. 500 years is a long time. 2000 years is almost unfathomable. 

[lemonlime 5503]

 

 

4 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Thought experiment- 

Mitch McConnell is presented with the west coast (and let’s throw Nevada in since it’s contiguous) leaving the United States- ensuring that congress is red well into the future and he’s majority leader for life. 
Is he going to order civil war to stop this from happening?  Would he rather be majority leader of most of the United States that are left or face a minority leader position in 2022?  How about other GOP Pols that would like to be president someday. Would they like to lose 80ish electoral votes that are guaranteed to be against them?   
They just kissed the ring of a fool and asshole and made him dictator of the party because it allowed them to keep some personal power for themselves, and I’m supposed to think that presented with a solution that would consolidate their hold on power indefinitely that its 100% certain that they would wage a civil war to keep that group in the country, that group electorally aligned against them that wants nothing more than their defeat? 
maybe. I’m not going to bet my life on that though. 

Yes. Because good luck to the country of TX, AL, MS, MO, AR, FL, GA, and OK without the tax base.  Y'all have fun with your schools with teachers paid 30k a year, except in 2021 you won't even have 30k a year to pay them.  No health insurance.   No Social Security. But you got rid of the libtards from the coasts.  

[NameAlreadyInUse 5129]

6 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Thought experiment- 

Mitch McConnell is presented with the west coast (and let’s throw Nevada in since it’s contiguous) leaving the United States- ensuring that congress is red well into the future and he’s majority leader for life. 
Is he going to order civil war to stop this from happening?  Would he rather be majority leader of most of the United States that are left or face a minority leader position in 2022?  How about other GOP Pols that would like to be president someday. Would they like to lose 80ish electoral votes that are guaranteed to be against them?   
They just kissed the ring of a fool and asshole and made him dictator of the party because it allowed them to keep some personal power for themselves, and I’m supposed to think that presented with a solution that would consolidate their hold on power indefinitely that its 100% certain that they would wage a civil war to keep that group in the country, that group electorally aligned against them that wants nothing more than their defeat? 
maybe. I’m not going to bet my life on that though. 

So this is why you aren't thinking about this correctly.  Mitch is also going to realize that those blue states are net contributors to the tax base.  He's not giving that up.  He'll maybe try to find a way to cheat his way into staying in power, but he's not going to get rid of the golden goose to stay in power.  He knows for damned sure that he's going to be in the position of having to figure out how to pay for the same shit with way less money coming in.  Because Mississippi isn't just suddenly going to become a net producer because California or Oregon are missing.  So yeah, he's not doing that.  Trump is dumb enough to think about it, but I don't think Congressional Republican leadership is that dumb yet.

[Wulaw Horn 19153]

Just now, NameAlreadyInUse said:

So this is why you aren't thinking about this correctly.  Mitch is also going to realize that those blue states are net contributors to the tax base.  He's not giving that up.  He'll maybe try to find a way to cheat his way into staying in power, but he's not going to get rid of the golden goose to stay in power.  He knows for damned sure that he's going to be in the position of having to figure out how to pay for the same shit with way less money coming in.  Because Mississippi isn't just suddenly going to become a net producer because California or Oregon are missing.  So yeah, he's not doing that.  Trump is dumb enough to think about it, but I don't think Congressional Republican leadership is that dumb yet.

Maybe. Like I said- it’s a counterfactual and I could be wrong. But I know a lot of people who would rather rule something lesser than be out of power in something greater. 
many people would rather own all of a grape than a little bit of a watermelon. 
looking forward to your thoughts later. I’m always interested in thought experiments like what you said you are going to respond to. 

[High Plains Drifter 11052]

 

Imma gonna change the subject slightly.

 

What if California just stopped sending federal taxes to the federal government?

Sort of an economic secession?