Should the Blue States Succeed from the Union?

Just want to see what everyone thinks

No. They need us.

~Ulrika~

I think if they're sad, the cheerful states should give them free backrubs.

No, both coasts would be separated from each other and we'd have to go through the middle to get anywhere.

Plus, there'd be the... y'know... war...

Oh lovely, just what I have always wanted for Christmas, a civil war....

Isn't this related to the fictional-but-speculative movie Southland Tales?

No its not. its refering to the stolen 2004 elections in which Ohio committed mass voter fraud by only providing 1 voting maching for 10000 democrats while providing 100 voting machines for every 1 republican.

Governor Taft should be in jail right now.

The states were shades of purple.
No one state voted 100% republican or 100% democratic.
Your question is moot.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=secede

I think Secession from the Union today, as compared to The War Between The States (otherwise known as The Civil War) , would draw it's lines along urban vs. rural boundaries in contrast to North vs. South.
I'm a Civil War Buff and I actually had a Civil War Memorabilia Museum in-world as my first business, but unfortunately had to shift focus to "SLitch Nilsson's Rock 'N' Roll-Arcade-Movies-Casino-Heaven" to try to pay the bills

Technically the US Supreme Court judges should have been arrested and jailed for the previous election fiasco though, but that ain't gonna happen either.

Is Taft *also* a big friend/contibutor to the Bush people like the judges and election officials from the first election? Cause that would explain a lot.

Governor Taft is a major Republican who campaigned for George the Second in Ohio and nearby states. he is the Governor of Ohio.

No - the blue counties should secede from the red counties. Then the red countryside would have no money or education, and the blue cities would have no food or fuel.

That's what I'm talking about. You win my post of the week award!

~Ulrika~

Should blue states succeed? Absolutely.

Should they secede? Absolutely not.

It's dispicable that the mentality among the most vocal "red state" leaders is that to disagree with them is to hate America. As a proud blue-stater, I don't hate America; I love America. I don't want to leave it. I want to take it back from the tyrants who have siezed it through lying, cheating, and stealing their way into the seats of power. It's gonna take a long time to repair the damage they've done to our great nation, and it's going to be a lot of hard work, but as a compatriot of mine once said "We choose to do [these] things not because they are easy, but because they are hard."

America will be great again one day. We all must do our part to make sure that happens. No one should leave.

Should Magnum S. secede from the union?

Which color is which?

Growing up in the cold war Red=Communist. I sort of lost track of the color codes after that.

The very fact that the election was close enough to be stolen shows that we got the president we deserve. Enough people voted for Bush. This isn't some secret conspiracy or a Cabal of 12 that fixed the election. Kerry and Gore might have won the popular vote, but they didn't win the vote enough for it to be descisive.

Bush is in until 2008. Nothing we can do about it. (And *please* don't mention impeachment. It's just not going to happen for too many reasons you should already know) Could we maybe just live our lives without trying to alienate each other even more?

Oh, Wait. I forget the purpose of online discussions is to express radical opinions, get enraged at each other, and forment extremist views.

What is it Torley used to quote? "We're all pro wrestlers in the ring of Second Life"? Heck, we behave with all the maturity of Hulk Hogans and Randy Savages on the Internet itself, let alone simply SL. What we really need is a Celebrity Death Match forum, where we can shove all these "Blue States should Secede" and "Proof that Atheism Rocks All Over Christianity" threads, and people could freely insult each others intelligence. With body slams.

If I have mis-spelled anything I apologize.

Well we came close to Impeachment but the Church frightened all the Congressmen who were going to go along with it and the matter was not even recorded.

Impeachment is the only tool we have left. If the Church would step out of the way, we could go about removing this tyrant from our nation.

What a great idea! The blue states could get on with their higher education, flat taxes, and health care and such. The red states would finally be free of all the free loaders and able to go shoot off their semi-automatic rifles (for hunting quail) and not have to deal with panty-waist good for nothing tree huggers keeping them from opening up parks for drilling all that precious oil to fuel their cars and taking all their money for crack head wefare mothers giving birth for higher weekly checks. We'd all get what we wanted!

As for war, that'd probably happen 20 years down the road when the Reds no longer have natural resources (and invade for oil, water, and women) and the Blues have eliminated the lower classes (and have no one to send to fight).
The Blues would lose, of course.

bwt - just cause it's bothering me:

Secede

Thanxies for remembering this.

Oh right, like the US would break apart just because a republican got elected to the whitehouse.

*chuckles* For some reason, I don't think the blue states would be passing any flat taxes.

People get in blue states once in a while after coitus. Sometimes it's bittersweet guilt because you were thinking about someone else, sometimes it's a feeling of loneliness as your lover gets up to leave rather than cuddling with you, and sometimes it's that you realize after all the passion that maybe you don't really love that person, that it was just a fling. Blue states commonly succeed union, but if you're going to ask the question "should" they succeed the union, then, in the interest of assigning value to subjective feelings, you must also ask "should" they precede the union? Is sex that is preceded by blue states just pity sex or perhaps sex for the wrong reason? Is pity sex even rewarding sex in the long run of things or is it just a momentary distraction? Does having sex that is preceded by blue states mean that you are not in the position to responsibly consent to having sex?

It's a question that only you can answer for yourself, but from my point of view there are less inherent dangers of blue states succeeding from union than preceding it.