A couple of quick points. 1) "The Media" had no such outrage when Blue states talked secession during the Trump admin. Therefore, as with virtually everything they write, it's absolutely impossible to find any credibility in "The Media". 2) Is it better for a battered wife to remain in a violent, loveless marriage, or to get a peaceful divorce? Because those are the two alternatives at this point.
Canadian here, but I support a secession in Canada and in the United States. In Canada, the votes of people in provinces west of the province of Ontario are useless. If the country is going to take our tax dollars, then our votes should mean something. If the federal government is not going to represent us, why are we paying taxes to people who do not care about us? If I could vote for a WEXIT right now, I would vote to leave.
Canadian here, but I support a succession in Canada and in the United States. In Canada, the votes of people in provinces west of the province of Ontario are useless. If the country is going to take our tax dollars, then our votes should mean something. If the federal government is not going to represent us, why are we paying taxes to people who do not care about us? If I could vote for a WEXIT right now, I would vote to leave.
Tim Pool just doesn't get it. These free states are forming right now. People are moving with their feet. These leftest are blinded by their ideology. There is going to be two parallel economies soon. The eventual bankruptcy of federal government is Imminent but in a lot of ways it has already happened. All these leftest will wake up one day stuck out in the cold and it will be all over. I'm glad that they are this delusional, gives us more time to get ready. I feel bad for the less fortunate people that are stuck in the middle that don't have the means to escape.
The progressive's need to keep this in mind. They do not have the balls to take our guns. They need to send the police. The police are more likely to be related to the public then the progressive elitist.
It's important to note that the immigration debate kicked off all of this. consider:
The terms of the union specify two closely related things. One, that there must be free movements of people between the states. Texas cannot erect and enforce an internal border with, say, New Mexico. But also two, the states cannot themselves enter contracts with foreign nations, and only the federal government can regulate the national border. These two laws with countered effects help to balance the way the union works.
However, sanctuary cities and the push to abolish ICE erode this tradeoff. California et. al. can independently act to let and keep people in, but states like Texas can't independently act to keep people out.
The consensus on states' rights in this country is swiss cheese right now. States' rights is bad because the confederacy was bad. But states rights is good when it comes to ignoring federal immigration law and legalizing drugs. But it's bad again when it comes to overturning gun regulations and imposing ones on abortion. Federal voter regulations are good when they prevent the states from making it more inconvenient to vote, but states have an inalienable right to run their own elections if the feds demand more voter security.
We build Freedom Of Speech Software. We champion free speech, individual liberty and the free flow of information online. All are welcome.