No. Let's actually examine your platitudes here. Who are we referring to here? A federally elected rep. Now find me a federally elected rep of the opposing side that is asking for seceding or leaving the country. There is a rule of law that you can find any narrow scope of extreme opinions if you narrow down your selection enough to fringe lunatics on Twitter. That isn't an argument for "both sides". I can find an opinion that advocates for murder for wanting ranch on French fries.
MTG being the looniest toon in Congress doesn't have any bearing on my theory of the case. If you want to move goalposts around that only elected officials' opinions qualify, then that's your prerogative, but I'm not interested in chasing that ball around.
Is he federally elected rep? Is he saying this out of sarcasm to make fun of the point of Conservatives who want to leave to show the holes in their logic? Do you think that is a sincere policy position of @Reeko rather him just making fun of the concept of seceding? Use the matter between your ears my friend.
Wait till you learn how people get chosen into Congress. It's a voting system where that person is a representative of thousands of people. What more do you want to learn about our federal government and how it works?
Let's ask him. @Reeko As for the gen pop, took all of a few minutes to find confirmation: https://thehill.com/changing-americ...ocking-poll-finds-many-americans-now-want-to/ https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-and-democrats-agree-they-dont-want-to-secede https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-and-democrats-agree-they-dont-want-to-secede https://dailyvoice.com/new-york/whi...mericans-who-want-to-secede-by-region/812724/ I'm sure if Trump or someone worse gets elected again under similarly dubious circumstances we'll end up with some elected Dems tooting the same horn. To act like the left doesn't have **** on its shoe on this issue is silly. Everybody hates everyone. Join the party.
Without any sort of constraint in the criteria of people we should examine, you then can effectively make an argument that every side even yours is extreme. That is the nature of social media and billions having access. Like I said I can find someone who wants to commit genocide for groups of people who use ranch as a dipping sauce for their French fries. So yes there has to be some sort of limit of who you can use as an example.
the level of mental gymnastics people will attempt in order to both sides an issue…like clockwork one person shoplifts, the other commits murder: “they’re both criminals”
Don't just provide links. Summarize the cognizant data that you think supports your arguments from each link. I want to see that you engaged with the content you spread rather than seeing a headline and assuming it sports your narrative.
Yes I can find any opinion in existence if I Google the specific opinion. What if I Google "people who use ranch on French fries should be shot"? You don't know how the internet works do you?
This is a very broad open ended statement. Your initial claim was that the left wants to dismantle the country as much as the right. When your claim now is so open ended like this of course you can defend it in some form from the nature of how open ended it is. The left has some **** on its shoes... Okay? What does that even mean?
Where in any of my posts did I say that I want to secede from the Union? I think it’s a joke Since Martin Taylor Greene and all these other right wingers want to secede so badly, if there was a way to section off some land for them to all go to where they can govern themselves and do what they want while leaving the rest of normal society alone, then I wouldn’t be opposed. It won’t go well for them in GOP nation, but that’s for them to find out. it’s 1 side that’s always talking about Civil War and secession…everyone else is just living their life
Who would even be GOP Nation’s allies? Russia and who? North Korea? Maybe China? no other nation is dealing with or allying with these crazies and incompetents
I don't classify "separatist" as succession or armed conflict only. If you wish to leave whenever things don't go your way, or encourage your ideological opponents to leave, then that's pretty separatey to me. It's all dissolution of the fabric of the country either way. It's also foolish to think that openly engaging in such behaviors and attitudes won't eventually lead to armed conflict anyway. There's no way to cleanly split up the country... it's like taking a dump without wiping after Chipotle. Not possible. It's gonna be messy.
That's the anarchists like the people that started CHAZ/CHOP. There have also been several occasions (generally when a Republican has won the election) that people here have talked about California seceding. Rarer, but they do exist. You don't need secession to accomplish Madge's goal though. Just radically reduce the power of the Federal government back to its Constitutional limits and it will be the border protecting, free trade enforcing collection of independently governed states she wants. No need for a National Divorce, just have Daddy government retire and leave running the business to the 50 kids.
Someone reading a right wing elected rep wants to leave the union and making fun of them by expressing the actual consequences in a hypothetical of what would happen is not advocating for their enemies to leave. They are advocating for how stupid their foresight is.
