What are the downsides of breaking America up?>

Depends on what you consider a "downside".

The one that has stood out in my mind the most, the downside I've contemplated the most, is that our resources are not distributed equally across the states.

Not every state has oil. Not every state has navigable waterways. Not every state has a saltwater coast with a good port or ports. Currently, interstate commerce is a piece of cake, compared to what it would become.

Yet somehow all the other candidates threw their support to him when they dropped out?

And Kamela Harris, hated by voters, is now on the ticket?

This is first of all, an obvious bate and switch. Joe won't make it 6 months. He will need to be in a home with 24/7 caregivers. Not exaggerating.

And anyone can see this. Clearly, Dem party operatives and donors can see this. Yet he is now the nominee, and the campaign goes on.

It is obvious that this is an attempt to install Harris in a subversion of the American Republic.

And because it is such an obvious farce, this tells me that the Leftist oligarchs now think America is at the point where it is ripe for the taking. They think America has been demoralized (literally) to the point where the Communist revolution can succeed next year!

Since Biden shouldn't be able to beat Kanye West in a fair election, let alone Trump, putting 2 and 2 together tells me the Left is planning the biggest election theft in American history, bigger than anything that Chicago Mayor Daily, or NYC Tammany Hall ever accomplished.

Antifa is a bunch of losers without jobs, but they are well-trained, well-equipped, and ride/fly around the country. That means they are well-funded and it's been going on for years. (Everyone on gab.com knows who is doing a lot of the funding.)

This means the wealthy globalists funding Antifa have been planning to steal this election for 4 years. I now believe they will succeed. But we must vote anyway, because our lives may depend on it. If we get 4 more years of Trump, we get 4 more years to prepare.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EiAkqnf...

LOL!

(But there's nothing wrong with some prunes. One must be regular to be happy!)

<Gezafan> called it long ago. He said that Harris would be president, and that we could confidently predict that based on the fact that she's colored and she's a woman.

<Since Biden shouldn't be able to beat Kanye West in a fair election, let alone Trump,...>

Just like with the 2016 election, when Biden shows up somewhere, there's hardly anyone attending his little event, but when Trump shows up, there's thousands of screaming supporters attending with thousands more outside the event area. In 2016 I said that Trump should win a fair election no matter what the polls said, because he was achieving Rockstar status and filling up arenas while Hillary couldn't fill up a high school gymnasium. It's the same this time around.

< thegoodanarchist: < Big Pawn: <tga: Of course it can work. The Soviet Union broke up.>

What are the downsides of breaking America up?>

Depends on what you consider a "downside".

The one that has stood out in my mind the most, the downside I've contemplated the most, is that our resources are not distributed equally across the states.>

Okay, one downside is the division of resources. I know you've given this topic lots of reflection, which is why I asked you about it.

In 2016 I said that Trump should win a fair election no matter what the polls said, because he was achieving Rockstar status and filling up arenas while Hillary couldn't fill up a high school gymnasium. It's the same this time around.>

And even MSM was covering his events from start to finish. I recall watching a Trump rally or 2 on CNN.

I never saw an HRC event on the news, but I was still a lib back then so I didn't think anything about it. Nor did I go looking for any HRC rally events because, for the first time in my life, 2016 was the year I didn't make up my mind until late October. In every previous election, I knew who I'd vote for before the conventions were held. (Which says a lot about the political Establishment. And none of it good.)

So we do have hope. IF (and it's a big IF) the elections in swing states are not stolen, Trump WILL win a second term. No doubt.

Another thing that gives me hope - where is the worst of the worst white hate going on? Where are the BLM riots most frequent and persistent? Where are Antifa riots and violence most persistent and frequent?

In the Blue states that were not even in play in 2016.

Twelve arsonists were arrested in 1 day on the Left coast, just days ago. Normies and conformies might get sick of riots, sick of protests, sick of breathing smoke. It is not out of the realm of possibility that a Blue State or two could flip without warning, shocking the MSM.

Other than dividing resources, are there any other downsides to breaking America up?>

Again:

<Depends on what you consider a "downside".>

Also, there are downsides that I think of as "tactical downsides" and downsides that I think of as "strategic" or "long term" downsides.

Tactically, how on earth do you divy up a country? Ben Kingsley portraid Ghandi in a movie, that I was once upon a time roped into watching. One of the scenes depicts the two sides (Hindi and Muslim) separating, and they are streaming by each other on the way to the land that welcomes them.

The outcome? People crossing the divide to attack the other side.

Unfortunately, I am thinking people must have gotten killed in that. But it was a tactical skirmish.

<Depends on what you consider a "downside".>>

Agreed.

I'm not really asking for a definition of downsides that we can all agree on or debate. I'm just asking you, since you've given this quite a bit of thought, what the downsides are.

<Tactically, how on earth do you divy up a country? >

Let's put that on hold for a while. I'd like to come up with a list of downsides to breaking up America first. Then we can talk about how to navigate those challenges I suppose, but right now I'm really only interested in broadening the scope of the topic by listing all of the downsides.

I haven't given it much thought, so I'm asking you. I've put my thought into where the country is now and if the problems are resolvable and, which solutions suggest themselves, which is how I came to realize that division may be necessary. But that's where it ends for me. Well, I've noted some of the benefits of dividing the country too, but I haven't come to a definite conclusion about it because the downsides haven't been listed and probed.

Given your experience with this topic and the strength of your opinion that succession seems to be the most plausible solution, you must have a number of downsides already dealt with in your mind, or perhaps you've argued them on other sites.

What are all the downsides?

The outcome? People crossing the divide to attack the other side.>

Exactly!

They don't want peace with us.
We would become Israel–Palestine 2.0.

Your "solution" is nothing more than "Peace in our time." It works as long as you pretend they are interested in being our friend. They won't be.

Imagine splitting the US down the middle "works." We get the right side, they get the left. After years of attacks on us, we'd reach a point where we'd need to shoot on site what crosses our border, shoot out of the sky what enters our airspace.

If anything like the real I/P conflict, media and the world will label us the bad guys, them the good guys.

My guess is they will be infiltrated by the folks who shout, or believe, "Death to America." They will enter as "refugees." Eventually, because of their incompetence, libs will be overthrown. We'd wind up with Russia/China/Iran on the ground, owning 50% of our land.

Even if that doesn't happen, it may as well be.

That said, why would they surrender anything? The drip, drip, drip, of immigration/indoctrination, suggests they will get the whole enchilada anyway?

It's at least possible, if Trump doesn't win, this could be our last election under a two-party system.

Do you know what their "solution" to dividing debt would actually be? What debt?
That's "white privilege" debt.

We were simply spending to compensate for
what you denied the minority. You pay the debt.

And even MSM was covering his events from start to finish. I recall watching a Trump rally or 2 on CNN.>

No, they haven't been interested in "news" for quite sometime. What they probably expected was to "use" a Trump rally. They probably figured with him speaking for an hour or more, they would have lie, after lie, to "use."

What they actually got was folks cheering America, Trump exposing liar media, Trump exposing their liar/lawbreaking politicians.

I call it "California".>

That depends.
I'm sure I could slum-it in Pelosi's mansion! :)

Don't forget, we've only seen libs under the constraints of our laws/Constitution, and with the burden of still having to win elections.

Of course, Beck made it sound like the tribulation is upon us. When it happens, "you better hope to God you're not in a blue state.... Pray like you've never prayed before!"

Meanwhile, I was cheering!

What is the news? <BP> you will like this because it is very similar to an idea you posited years ago.

His sources are telling him that Dem operatives are war gaming the possible election outcomes. If Trump wins, they want California to threaten to secede from the Union if their demands are not met.

The demands, of course, are just power grabs designed to give the Left total power.

1. Abolish the Electoral College.
2. Split Cali into 5 states for "better" representation in the US Senate.

While Beck was weeping and gnashing his teeth in despair, I was yelling at the car radio: Let them go! Let them go!

This is the BEST thing I can think of, for the rest of America. Get those 55 Commie Electoral Votes out of the USA!

I'm pretty sure once they don't require that anymore, today's NY/CA will look like paradise.>

Your "solution" is nothing more than "Peace in our time." It works as long as you pretend they are interested in being our friend. They won't be.>

I can see why it looks that way to you. It's because we haven't covered all the angles yet, in these discussions.

But there are more layers to this onion. My understanding is that there is already a system in place to verify citizenship, called "e-Verify". So in the new nation we start with that. If we enforce it, self deportation will become real.

This is important why? Look at the nations that haven't fallen to liberalism. Russia, Hungary, places like that. Why? Because Hungary is full of Hungarians. Russia is full of Russians. Monoethnicity leads to monoculture leads to strong nations that resist Cultural Marxism, which is what is destroying America.

If we get away from enough of the Blue states, to where the Dem party is no longer a political force, then the Republican Party becomes the new Left. The American people in Red states are FAR more conservative than most of the RINOs who represent them. So a new party will form to the right of the GOP, and we can finally succeed in reversing the demoralization that has plagued us since the early 1960s.

Without the hard left pull of the Dems, we can build a true nation, not just a country cobbled together from disparate former colonies. We can become like the Western Civilization version of Russia.

The Palestinian people are small in numbers and in economic activity, so it is easy to dismiss them. Plus, Israel is much larger and stronger than they are. If America broke up into 2 (or more) nations, the Red States will be stronger than the Blue States, morally, economically, and culturally. They will remain a force to be reckoned with on the world stage.

The Blue States will become like Africa.

<That said, why would they surrender anything? The drip, drip, drip, of immigration/indoctrination, suggests they will get the whole enchilada anyway? >

Last time it was tried: 4 years of war, 600,000 dead ...

I've read your original post:

chessgames.com chessforum (kibitz #33803)

I cannot believe that was deleted by an admin!

There is nothing offensive or rude in your post at all.

In fact quite the contrary. It reflects the genuine concern of a long-time member who has made a substantial contribution to this site.

Instead of your post being deleted there should have been a subsequent post by one of the admins thanking you for raising those issues.

Unfortunately, it seems there have been a number of posts deleted at the whim of the admins in recent times, without any reason or justification whatsoever.

If the admins concentrated on the important issues such as those raised in your post, instead of obsessing over minutiae, they could get this site back on track.

I cannot believe that was deleted by an admin! >

And...my subsequent post, something like:

"You've got to be kidding. Post what I said here, so everyone can read it, and we'll see who agrees with you. I expect nobody will."

https://www.mrctv.org/videos/newt-g...

You can't talk about leftist billionaire George Soros on Fox News.

Newt sounds like me in this clip, believe it or not, and then gets totally shut down in a bad and awkward way. Never quite seen anything like that before.

He then quips about it being "verboten", again sounding like me here.

My understanding is that there is already a system in place to verify citizenship, called "e-Verify". >

I'm more worried about their e-Not-Verify.

<The Palestinian people are small in numbers and in economic activity, so it is easy to dismiss them.>

How would they do with half our military and GDP? (I assume that's what Dems would get)

<The Blue States will become like Africa.>

Over time, but initially they should be as strong as us. (except for testosterone levels)

When that happens there should be a mass refugee problem. (At some point your family members should wake-up)

Not to mention it would make them easy pickens for Russia/China/Iran.

Basically, America's chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

<Read my post above, about what Glen Beck said today.>

Surrender for only one state?
Doesn't seem likely.

They've basically bankrupted blue states to "get" Trump. Bad time to separate.

Sounds like one of those stories to get a voter who would say: "I don't want to break up the country, I'll vote Biden."

They are also threatening more violence
if Trump wins.

Last time it was tried: 4 years of war, 600,000 dead ...>

You're still living in 1860? You might be the only one...

Pol Pot killed 2 or 3 million Cambodians, about 25% of the population.

Mao and Stalin, though, beat that by an order of magnitude.