Secede

[talisyn]

How many times have the Republicans won the popular vote in the past 6 POTUS elections??

Three?

[Just_A_Guy]

Just once, I think, in 2004. Obama won it in 2012 and 2008. Gore won it in 2000. Clinton had pluralities, I think, in 1996 and 1992 thanks to Ross Perot.

[dahlia]

I imagine, by and large, Texas would end up poorly defended and over run by Mexico cartel before too long.

You have a low opinion of Texans, if you think there is any way on God's green earth they would let that happen.

I find this all very interesting. I doubt it will get far, but I'd like to study what happened, or what do people think will happen, with this election that has caused a significant number of people and multiple states to seriously consider secession.

Parties lose elections all the time. One year your guy wins, one year he's out. People seem to be able to go with the flow, even if they are unhappy with the outcome. But something is different now, to cause this conversation. Very interesting.

[dahlia]

Wow, when I first heard about the states petitioning Texas only had 2,000 signatures.

Because I had to look up how to spell 'secession,' I just saw a news story that said Texas had over 100,000 signatures.

There are also petitions from all 50 states now, though I imagine the petitions will go further in some states than others. I guess these petitions are like law suits. Anyone can bring one for almost any reason, but simply filing a lawsuit doesn't mean you've won.

[Wingnut]

I find this all very interesting. I doubt it will get far, but I'd like to study what happened, or what do people think will happen, with this election that has caused a significant number of people and multiple states to seriously consider secession.

According to this article, it's not uncommon, nor is it unique to this election.

[Guest]

According to this article, it's not uncommon, nor is it unique to this election.

There's quite a number of active Secessionist groups in the US. I read a while back that they have been holding annual conventions lately...

This one is different - only Vermont actually made a secessionist splash in 2004 - that is, actually acted on it. I didn't even remember a splash in 2008.

This time, there were petitions for secession filed by people unaffiliated with any active secessionist groups.

I agree with the article though. It's more for a statement and not really to go to war over it.

[volgadon]

Lots of great (and not-so-great) fiction out there exploring how things could go. I wonder if people wrote fiction about the future of the British Empire in the 19th century?

I'm trying to recall any before the early 20th c.

[BrendaM]

Highly unlikely. Quebec has been trying to separate from Canada for years. We're still stuck with them.

[Wingnut]

Highly unlikely. Quebec has been trying to separate from Canada for years. We're still stuck with them.

Much to your chagrin?

[Blackmarch]

Anyone else reading up on the individual states which are requesting to secede from the United States?

Is this likely to occur? I understand they need 25K signatures from the populace.

naaahh people are too lazy nowadays

[LittleWyvern]

This time, there were petitions for secession filed by people unaffiliated with any active secessionist groups.

Although, one could argue that the Tea Party is now an active secessionist group.

[mnn727]

No state has petitioned to secede.

All you have are a bunch of internet petitions that are absolutely worthless.

[bytor2112]

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Preamble, Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

[annewandering]

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Preamble, Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

I believe that the right of the people would be by majority rule. We have no such majority wishing to institute a new government.

[bytor2112]

I believe that the right of the people would be by majority rule. We have no such majority wishing to institute a new government.

Majority rule is mob rule...we are a representative republic. Your right....mamby pamby, whiney, can't fend for themselves, weak, lazy, covetous, all words to describe what is left of the American Spirit.

[annewandering]

Majority rule is mob rule...we are a representative republic. Your right....mamby pamby, whiney, can't fend for themselves, weak, lazy, covetous, all words to describe what is left of the American Spirit.

Such a nice of opinion of the rights and intelligence of the American people.

[bytor2112]

Such a nice of opinion of the rights and intelligence of the American people.

The comment was regarding the American Spirit...not "rights or intelligence".

[Just_A_Guy]

I believe that the right of the people would be by majority rule. We have no such majority wishing to institute a new government.

But Wikipedia alleges that only 40-45% of American colonists (excluding slaves) supported the American revolution (see entry for "patriot"). That's a plurality but not a majority.

[annewandering]

But Wikipedia alleges that only 40-45% of American colonists (excluding slaves) supported the American revolution (see entry for "patriot"). That's a plurality but not a majority.

I would be real curious how that percentage was determined. Did they have accurate polls back then? Did they even have polls? If it was by vote did everyone eligible vote? In other words I have to doubt this sources reliability.

[Just_A_Guy]

I can only refer you back to Wiki, which paints the number as historical consensus.

[LittleWyvern]

Majority rule is mob rule...we are a representative republic. Your right....mamby pamby, whiney, can't fend for themselves, weak, lazy, covetous, all words to describe what is left of the American Spirit.

I honestly can't tell if you're a secessionist or just soul-crushingly pessimistic.

EDIT: Perhaps this is the root of the Tea Party's secessionist movement: a belief that the USA has somehow become a horrible country that is utterly doomed and has no future.

Edited November 16, 2012 by LittleWyvern

[Guest]

I honestly can't tell if you're a secessionist or just soul-crushingly pessimistic.

EDIT: Perhaps this is the root of the Tea Party's secessionist movement: a belief that the USA has somehow become a horrible country that is utterly doomed and has no future.

How did the Tea Party become secessionists again? The TEA party is pretty straight-forward in their platform. Taxed Enough Already. That's all there is to it. The principle is to reduce deficits and get out of debt by reducing government spending without raising taxes. So, raising taxes - as what is now on the table in Congress - is against the principles of the TEA party.

A TEA Party candidate, therefore, is somebody who holds these principles. If a TEA Party candidate is an extremist on the abortion issue, it is not because he is a TEA Party candidate. That's not in the TEA Party platform.

The TEA Party has not at any time considered secession in their party platform.

[LittleWyvern]

How did the Tea Party become secessionists again?

No clue. They seem to be the ones that are the most vocal about it, but I have no idea why.

[Guest]

No clue. They seem to be the ones that are the most vocal about it, but I have no idea why.

Do you have a source? I can't seem to find anything about it through google.

Or is this just another one of those MoveOn.org types assigning blame on the Tea Party for anything from the Batman shooting to the secession...

[LittleWyvern]

Do you have a source? I can't seem to find anything about it through google.

My claim results from seeing a lot of pro-secessionist posts on news sites I usually associate with the Tea Party: For example, teaparty.org (this link), Infowars, theblaze, etc. I apologize if it seems like I'm trying to assign secession as an official stance of the Tea Party. It's at the very least a stubborn fad within the movement.

Or is this just another one of those MoveOn.org types assigning blame on the Tea Party for anything from the Batman shooting to the secession...