Calexit - California wants to secede from the Union

Thread title is overblown, to say the least. A few people want to make noise about it. But "California wants to secede" is probably less accurate than "Texas wanted to secede" in the times of Jade Helm. Ah, innocent times.

 

If California secedes, after that the Republicans really probably would win the presidency for the next 50 years. Without their electoral votes, the Democrats would be up a certain creek without a paddle.

 

Detriment*
I remember calc 3 also lol.

 

I volunteer to help build the wall to keep them out!!!

 

A state that is over 450 billion dollars in debt that has run into serious problems when it comes to running out of water and electricity over the last 20 years is not a state that could realistically secede. They'd be a failed state in no time which is why I laugh at this and say it would be funny if they did. Perhaps their people would learn something about fiscal responsibility in the ordeal.

 

strongly in favor of this, for any state

 

The narrow minded liberals amaze me of their ignorance.

Only liberals would think Silicone Valley is a natural resource for tech. Drill baby drill! We need more silicone!

 

Washington and Oregon would probably want to go too. Nevada would be a toss up. Too bad Arizona and Utah lie between Colorado/New Mexico and the rest of the enlightened contingent. Hawaii would also see no reason to stay. The reds can keep everything east of the Rockies. New England will just have to fend for itself. This is like straight out of World War Z.

Then we will see who is the failed state. Smart money would not be on the reds. Would the rest of the United Red States of 'Murica (especially sans New England) even be in the top 5 in GDP?

 

I doubt that many states would be stupid enough to try.....and if they did then they'd face serious economic hardship....and would almost certainly be attacked by the US and they'd have no way of defending themselves.

And when we're talking about GDP, honestly, do you really think that those businesses would remain in California if they weren't going to be part of the US? I get liberal naivete and whatnot, but c'mon man. California literally couldn't even keep the lights on not that long ago, those morons would never be able to fend for themselves.

 

Uhh yeah. If Washington leaves, it would join BC long before California. Liberals put way too much stock in California. The west coast would starve half way through the first winter.

There is a very good reason why there is always talk about Texas leaving the union.... Its because they actually have the resources to do so.

 

Californians of all political leanings put too much stock in California. Some of us just don't know what it means that the state hasn't enough water.

 

It's an accurate statement that's disingenuous. You can delude yourself into thinking that it wasn't disingenuous, but really no one is going to agree with you. Go ahead and continue to look silly defending it though.

 

And if we're honest, Texas couldn't do it for long either. It's fun to say and all of that, but it's not realistic even if the US allowed it to happen without immediately invading. Texas would do a better job of it than California though if only due to the fact that Texas produces enough electricity to keep the lights on has enough water to prevent the population from starving or dying of thirst....so that's something.

 

In no way is it disingenuous. It was an accurate statement and is 100% sincere. In fact, it's odd that you think I need to "defend" the statement given that no one has intelligently attacked it.

 

Because you tried to link the Democratic party from the past like it has any similarities to the Democratic party of today, knowing full well that the Republican party of today is more closely aligned with the Democratic party from the past who was angry about slavery being eliminated.

You knew all of this, yet still made that statement. You were either disingenuous, or actually stupid enough to think that the Democratic party of today and the past are ideologically the similar.

 

So in your mind, it's not "fair" to link the Democratic party with the Democratic party? Gotcha. You are absolutely brilliant. Thank you for posting. Now leave your betters alone and run along to find some peers.

 

It's not fair to link the 2016 Democratic party with the one from over a century ago.

I gave you two choices, either to be disingenuous or be stupid. Looks like you chose to be stupid. All right then.

 

It's the same party, sure they've changed tactics, but they are still the same and when Democrats are upset, usually it means good things for America.

 

The people you are referring to are today's republicans. The southern slave states didn't just change their values in a couple of decades.

 

Sure, that's the spin you'll hear from the party of Jefferson Davis trying to blame their deeds on the party of Lincoln. It's been pretty successful to where you have the party of slavery "owning" the vote of upwards of 90% of those descended from those the party once owned outright.

Anyway, this has been fun and all, but let's get back on topic to the next Democratic party run state that wants to secede.