I am being honest. You honestly mentioned Trump by name 3 times and by pronoun once in the OP. The GOP “facilitating” twice.
Honestly.
And? Context matters, does it not?
Peaceful secession or civil war. No I’m not joking.
Of course it does. The context is it is Trump’s fault.
The tyranny envisioned in Brutus #1 would prevent either, would it not? If so, then what?
I’m completely against breaking up any states. I feel that will be the end of the country. Felons I believe should be able to vote, and the only changes I want to see to the court will be copy and pasted from Safiel’s threads.
Democrats should not escalate, but… looking at my peers at the unbelievable amount of salt over Garland, I can’t say they won’t and I’m just going to have to watch helplessly.
Good grief man. If that is what you want to simplify it all down to, then there is no helping you. Perhaps being less emotional would help. I don’t know how many different ways I can say this preceded Trump, has continued with Trump and sped up, and has the potential to continue to speed up after he is gone.
Get on with it, then. Your mind is made up. You’re just waiting for Democrats to follow the escalation to give you an excuse. You don’t need us. Get to movin’, Man.
No. Beating her required an absolutely a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody’s part. And Trump was the only guy for the job.
The rest of them wilted under the pressure from their own side.
It has so far with the one exception of an immoral cause. So the tyranny was “ratcheted up”.
Why do you want to prevent it?
That is the work of Republicans, not Democrats. The proposed division would create 1 ultra liberal state and 2 moderately conservative states
I’m not at all emotional unless you count bemused. “I’m not blaming Trump but the democrats want to do this because of Trump and the GOP because Trump ushered in Trump’s legacy.”
You’re accusing Sneak of emotionalism?
When your posts clearly based on emotions?
I agree. And I do not believe there is a recourse to take us back to a point in time where it can be reconciled. We are to big to fail in the eyes of those in power.
Why do I want to prevent what? Civil war?
I’m just waiting for everybody else to catch up. I’m a bad ass, but even I can’t fight 140 million people by myself.
I’m 60 years old. Ain’t bendy no more.
Would the “end of the country” really be so bad?
It was never reconciled nor reconcilable from the beginning. Madison found that out too late.
The break up. How it happens is less relevant. Cvil war will only come by trying to prevent it. Just like last time.
You seem rather emotional, as you continue to misrepresent the totality of my point and the context therein. Either that, or you are trolling. Because I never said, “the Democrats want to do this because of Trump.”
For the last time, both sides have been doing it. With each side outdoing the other, in a tit-for-tat escalation of the abandonment of political norms. Trump has accelerated the process. Will the natural progression from this on-going occurrence result in what the article suggests?
If that is not clear enough for you, then we are done on this topic.
Why?
We, as Americans, preach about self determination to other people all of the time. But let Americans talk about forming new nations out of this one and suddenly everyone else (the right and the left) are willing to bomb them into the Stone Age for even daring to entertain the idea.
I like the idea of 10 different American countries. Each with its own constitution and sets of laws. Bound together through a common federal military and free trade.
I see what I see. It’s not really relevant anymore, you can complain about Trump all you want, you can’t put him back in the bottle.
The way I see it, Obama and the dems are the root cause of Trump.
