The talk around here is that if Clinton wins, the Southern states will leave the Union.
2007-08-26 17:27:20 · 26 answers · asked by giannasanmarco 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think we all would be better off. Considering nearly 70% of the GNP comes from the west and east coasts, then losing Alabama, Texas, Florida, Arkansas and other yahoo states would ease the burden on the rest of us (that, and cut the welfare roles as well)
2007-08-26 17:33:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 7⤋
Not sure, and I hope we wouldn't enter a civil war.
It's really sad how the generalizations pop out in the responses. Wholesale hatred of people in different regions, and perspectives that only racist-like individuals could fawn to.
A lot of these people are sick to want civil war. I'm ashamed to call these people Americans. Has America really gotten to that point that we would allow such mindless violence? Have we not learned from the first war, that it was two sides with mindless egos....not willing to rationally work things out?
Perhaps I read too much into history, but there's nothing civil about 'civil' war. Anyone preaching the desire for that is sick. If that happened, which I doubt, I think we as people need to work it out...if we don't, I'll let the two mindless sides hack-up each other. This won't be my country anymore.
2007-08-26 19:18:39 · answer #2 · answered by Rick 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The South will not secede from the Union. If she should win, which I don't think she will, southerns would ride it. Southerns are Americans and have every right to be heard. Like it or not.
2007-08-26 18:19:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
If Hillary wins, it won't be just the Southern states that will want out of the Union. The Rocky Mountain and mid-western states will want out, too, especially if she tries going after gun rights. That will be a line in the sand for people in those states.
That said, if states do try to secede, the rest of the country will have to ask itself if it would be right to fight against people who only want to peacefully separate and govern themselves as they see fit, leaving the rest of the states to do the same. They'll have to ask themselves how "American" it would be to fight against and kill such people, especially when this country was founded by an act of secession from Great Britain.
Just because Lincoln did it doesn't mean it was right. There is nothing in the Constitution that says that a state cannot secede. Lincoln had a chance to let the Southern states go in peace (most of the Northern population was in favor of that), but instead he chose to act as if the Southern states had never seceded, and he refused their attempts at negotiation. He backed them into a corner where they had no choice but to fight, and them blamed them for it.
Peaceful separation on mutually acceptable terms would be a much more "American" thing to do than to impose unity by force and violence. Unity in and of itself is not necessarily a good thing (the Soviets had a Union...and we were happy when it broke up). The important thing is the basis of the Union, and in America that basis is, or is supposed to be, freedom. That is what the Union was established to defend; forcefully subjugating a people who simply want to go their own way and govern themselves according to what they believe is right cannot be reconciled with defending freedom. It would be an act of brutality, an exercise in might-makes-right.
Secession is self-determination, plain and simple; and there is no more American ideal than that.
2007-08-26 17:35:44 · answer #4 · answered by jeffersonian73 3 · 7⤊ 5⤋
Don't you think they've learned their lesson about secession? They might not like it, nor would I, but unlike the whiny Hillary supporters, the South will deal with it.
2007-08-26 17:47:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
That didn't work out to well for the South the last time they tried it. Right now, with the standard of living and the depressed wages being the worst in the south, things will only get worse for the south if you tried to secede.
2007-08-26 17:38:12 · answer #6 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 8⤊ 5⤋
It won't happen; it would violate US laws for the South to secede, and US soldiers would be forced to fire on the Cons, rednecks and hillbillies.
The North and the West didn't secede when Bush stole a couple of elections; I doubt the South would do the same if Hillary is elected.
2007-08-26 17:33:53 · answer #7 · answered by MenifeeManiac 7 · 9⤊ 6⤋
I'd celebrate.
And not because Hillary won, but because the South seceded.
Clearly, the United States are not very united when it comes to north and south. I'd have no problem with such a division, and in fact I think it would do great things for its people, assuming we didn't have to resort to a war in effort to reunite ourselves.
I know you make marriage vows with the intention to stay together, but if things get too unhealthy for both parties, divorce is inevitably the best option.
2007-08-26 17:33:08 · answer #8 · answered by Buying is Voting 7 · 5⤊ 5⤋
I'll be staying back, and fighting for her to be pulled out of office. Just thinking about her possibility of winning gives me serious chills down my spine.
2007-08-26 18:10:10 · answer #9 · answered by Twiggy 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I do not think the Southern States has anything to worry about, and besides talk is some time just gossip.
2007-08-26 17:33:18 · answer #10 · answered by lilly4 6 · 5⤊ 3⤋
The talk you're hearing is wrong. Clinton was first lady of Arkansas for around 8 years, wasn't she? In that light, she IS an adopted southerner.
It's just more extremists making extreme statements which they'll never follow up.
2007-08-26 17:35:41 · answer #11 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 6⤊ 4⤋