Let the flaming bags of poo fly

[_Sheffjs_]

If we're to divide the country into two land sections one for the liberals and one for the conservatives what would be the outcome of each side in the space of one presidential term?   

[PAVALKER]

Assuming.... each area would have their own Government, President, and the individuals of each persuasion would be required to move to that designated area?

Oh my....that is  a dream isn't it.   

[Moonshot_1]

If we're to divide the country into two land sections one for the liberals and one for the conservatives what would be the outcome of each side in the space of one presidential term?   

We'd have the all liberals on the West Coast because it is sinking and we'll soon be rid of them.

The real question is what do we do with all the knuckleheads in between them.  They are the ones causing the problems.

[Rams]

Based on the last two elections, I have to suggest that both East and West Coast Liberals would be would be separated by the Conservative center and Southern states.   It would almost be three separate countries.   

[The emperor has no clothes]

If we're to divide the country into two land sections one for the liberals and one for the conservatives what would be the outcome of each side in the space of one presidential term?   

Although this may seem like Nirvana to many on here, I wouldn't like it one bit.

[FryeVRCCDS0067]

In many ways it sounds like a great thing. But, if it happened, it would probably be three divisions as mentioned above.

I think if it somehow happened, the left coast, at least the kalafornika part would be annexed by Mexico quickly.

As far as the other liberal area, I think they would find out they can't feed themselves and the criminal element would quickly turn them into a third world country.

The freedom loving middle would do well but would have to spend a lot on defense because of their neighbors.

[Rams]

In many ways it sounds like a great thing. But, if it happened, it would probably be three divisions as mentioned above.

I think if it somehow happened, the left coast, at least the kalafornika part would be annexed by Mexico quickly.

As far as the other liberal area, I think they would find out they can't feed themselves and the criminal element would quickly turn them into a third world country.

The freedom loving middle would do well but would have to spend a lot on defense because of their neighbors.

With the majority of natural resources in the central and southern states, the east coast and west would be clamoring for food and energy.   Wouldn't take long for an all out war.    Just based on the numbers, the two coasts would probably win.    It would make the previous war between the states look like a BBQ.   

Code:

Of course, since the East and West Coast have pretty much outlawed weapons in private individual's hands, it might be a decent fight.

   Don't want to see that but, a couple more divisive terms in the White House and anything is possible.

[Serk]

[Karen]

I'd just like to quietly remind you all that some of us flaming bags of poo have been flying for quite a long time without the aid of this thread...  just a simple broomstick will do.

[The emperor has no clothes]

What exactly is it that makes conservatives feel they are the ones who work hard and only they are the ones who care about our country ? And you guys would not be fine without liberals. The health care system would collapse do to all the high blood pressure and anxiety problems from them not having anybody to bitch about and blame things on. 

[Jess from VA]

THIS!!!!

Without working people's money to fund the socialism, the socialists would soon be eating each other.  

A quite happy outcome all around.  

The reality show would then be shifted from The Walking Dead, to The Walking Socialists  (which is what the show is really about anyway).

Unfortunately, there is no easy geographic solution.

And to be fair, the Free crap Army isn't really liberal... it just votes for whoever gives them free crap.  Their only actual politics is self interest.   They've learned to parrot the liberal agenda to be part of the team, but if the conservatives gave them more money/benefits than the liberals, they'd learn to parrot the conservative agenda in short order.

Of course, this could never happen since the conservative agenda would never include bankrupting the country to buy the votes of half the population. 

[baldo]

THIS!!!!

Without working people's money to fund the socialism, the socialists would soon be eating each other.  

A quite happy outcome all around.  

The reality show would then be shifted from The Walking Dead, to The Walking Socialists  (which is what the show is really about anyway).

Unfortunately, there is no easy geographic solution.

And to be fair, the Free crap Army isn't really liberal... it just votes for whoever gives them free crap.  Their only actual politics is self interest.   They've learned to parrot the liberal agenda to be part of the team, but if the conservatives gave them more money/benefits than the liberals, they'd learn to parrot the conservative agenda in short order.

Of course, this could never happen since the conservative agenda would never include bankrupting the country to buy the votes of half the population. 

Wow.....I am truly speechless.

[flsix]

Jerry, it must have been a slow day at the office
Just needed a big spoon, a pot, and a piece of meat to get things started.  
Nicely done
Interesting thought though.

[Patrick]

THIS!!!!

Without working people's money to fund the socialism, the socialists would soon be eating each other.  

A quite happy outcome all around.  

The reality show would then be shifted from The Walking Dead, to The Walking Socialists  (which is what the show is really about anyway).

Unfortunately, there is no easy geographic solution.

And to be fair, the Free crap Army isn't really liberal... it just votes for whoever gives them free crap.  Their only actual politics is self interest.   They've learned to parrot the liberal agenda to be part of the team, but if the conservatives gave them more money/benefits than the liberals, they'd learn to parrot the conservative agenda in short order.

Of course, this could never happen since the conservative agenda would never include bankrupting the country to buy the votes of half the population. 

I can't stand watching those TV shows, now I know why.

[_Sheffjs_]

Jerry, it must have been a slow day at the office
Just needed a big spoon, a pot, and a piece of meat to get things started.  
Nicely done
Interesting thought though.

No slow days right now. More like the speed of the new Valk!!   

[Pappy!]

Hmmm....I see that up a few posts the thought is that the left coast and the right coast would win a war with the central and Southern. Interesting.
That is assuming a lot!

First off - most liberals and guns do not mix well. (Not all so you libs reading this please don't get your knickers in a twist)

Secondly - The liberals would sit around and wait for someone to organize them, probably to the point most would starve or have to defend against other libs trying to steal what they have left.

Third - Most of the liberals that do own guns have stolen them, they are hand guns, and are shot in a sideways handhold position otherwise known as the "I'm gonna' pop a cap in your ass" position.

Figured I would add a little levity to this thread.
Will probably be called a racist at any moment now.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Hmmm....I see that up a few posts the thought is that the left coast and the right coast would win a war with the central and Southern. Interesting.
That is assuming a lot!

First off - most liberals and guns do not mix well. (Not all so you libs reading this please don't get your knickers in a twist)

Secondly - The liberals would sit around and wait for someone to organize them, probably to the point most would starve or have to defend against other libs trying to steal what they have left.

Third - Most of the liberals that do own guns have stolen them, they are hand guns, and are shot in a sideways handhold position otherwise known as the "I'm gonna' pop a cap in your ass" position.

Figured I would add a little levity to this thread.
Will probably be called a racist at any moment now.

Nah I wouldn't say racist. Maybe something else.

[Serk]

The liberals would sit around and wait for someone to organize them, probably to the point most would starve or have to defend against other libs trying to steal what they have left.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uffhVqum7P4

[Pappy!]

Hmmm....I see that up a few posts the thought is that the left coast and the right coast would win a war with the central and Southern. Interesting.
That is assuming a lot!

First off - most liberals and guns do not mix well. (Not all so you libs reading this please don't get your knickers in a twist)

Secondly - The liberals would sit around and wait for someone to organize them, probably to the point most would starve or have to defend against other libs trying to steal what they have left.

Third - Most of the liberals that do own guns have stolen them, they are hand guns, and are shot in a sideways handhold position otherwise known as the "I'm gonna' pop a cap in your ass" position.

Figured I would add a little levity to this thread.
Will probably be called a racist at any moment now.

Nah I wouldn't say racist. Maybe something else.

LOl...you would be calling me accurate??
Cool....there is hope for you yet, Meathead

[The emperor has no clothes]

Well... That wasn't exactly what I had in mind. 

[baldo]

My first thought.....where is the redeeming quality of this thread? It's sole purpose is to stir the pot. Coming from someone who has been accused of being a troublemaking liberal, I find it to be totally unnecessary and a waste of keystrokes. Even I wouldn't post something like this.

[Valkorado]

Didn't see the rule that all posts must be redeeming.

[_Sheffjs_]

My first thought.....where is the redeeming quality of this thread? It's sole purpose is to stir the pot. Coming from someone who has been accused of being a troublemaking liberal, I find it to be totally unnecessary and a waste of keystrokes. Even I wouldn't post something like this.

I agree it stirs the pot or can depending on how one responds however for me I was hoping to hear the Lib side in detail. So far the only in-depth side is the conservative side.    I have a VERY liberal boss who I really like and we work great together. We never discuss............   It is just good business, so better to ask here.       Oh, and he is a really HARD worker!!

The thought came to me when reading an article where it states the Left is becoming more Left and the right is becoming more right.  

[Jess Tolbirt]

lot of conservatives out here that can shoot the eye out of a squirrel at 100 yards.. some of us have to  so we can eat meat once in a while
 

[Gryphon Rider]

My first thought.....where is the redeeming quality of this thread? It's sole purpose is to stir the pot. Coming from someone who has been accused of being a troublemaking liberal, I find it to be totally unnecessary and a waste of keystrokes. Even I wouldn't post something like this.

Well, one redeeming thing is that the only name-calling so far is by you and Meathead, you calling yourself a "troublemaking liberal", and Meathead calling himself, well, "Meathead".  Also, inhabitants of coastal states are now more aware of the need to improve their gun-handling and marksmanship skills. 

[Willow]

If we're to divide the country into two land sections one for the liberals and one for the conservatives what would be the outcome of each side in the space of one presidential term?   

First, my friend, it's a pretty dumbass proposal to consider.  Liberals and conservatives are not separated in this country by land locations.  It's true that in some areas there are more of one than the other and thus the explanation of how voting tends to go.  A really good example of where the two (or three or four) groups are greatly mixed would be in the Republic of Texas.  Although the Republic tends to be a very good place to be a conservative there are indeed several pockets controlled by the liberal vote and speculation that in the near future the state as a whole my roll over to a liberal dominated vote.

What we need to learn is first to disagree while still acknowledging that those on the other side are sincere and well meaning, but see the world and goals very differently.  Then we need to become aware that what the two ends of the spectrum are doing during the elections is courting the uncommitted group across the middle of the spectrum.

Now to address the proposal.  Were the country to divide into two countries, one for conservatives and one for liberals it would not be long at all before those groups discovered differing factions within themselves and split again.  That would, of course, continue to take place until the entire once nation became a collection of little meaningless groupings (countries?) serving no greater purpose in this world than to simply try to accomplish their own survival.

I tend to agree that the original post on this thread in this place serves no purpose but to promote dissention, divide and call upon a fair amount of chest thumping, pot stirring, and intentional aggravation.  What one would choose not to discuss with his disagreeing boss would be a good measure of what and how would be meaningfully discussed here.

As to the comment of no rule requiring a post to be redeeming, all communication should be redeeming in some form.  All.  Communication that has no redeeming value is, by definition, without value or good purpose.  Perhaps we were having trouble with understanding the meaning of redeeming.

I live in Kansas.  There are lots of folks living around me that have political and social values similar to my own.  There are a lot of folks who don't.  I find reason to disagree often and sometimes strongly with the ones with whom I usually agree.  I'm not ready to spilt from the country yet.  Of course, I no longer live in Texas.  I'm at a point I would not be too surprised to see Texas or California go that route.  Did you know that three of the ten most populated cities in the country are in California and three are in Texas (Austin is number eleven)? 

[baldo]

If we're to divide the country into two land sections one for the liberals and one for the conservatives what would be the outcome of each side in the space of one presidential term?  

First, my friend, it's a pretty dumbass proposal to consider.  Liberals and conservatives are not separated in this country by land locations.  It's true that in some areas there are more of one than the other and thus the explanation of how voting tends to go.  A really good example of where the two (or three or four) groups are greatly mixed would be in the Republic of Texas.  Although the Republic tends to be a very good place to be a conservative there are indeed several pockets controlled by the liberal vote and speculation that in the near future the state as a whole my roll over to a liberal dominated vote.

What we need to learn is first to disagree while still acknowledging that those on the other side are sincere and well meaning, but see the world and goals very differently.  Then we need to become aware that what the two ends of the spectrum are doing during the elections is courting the uncommitted group across the middle of the spectrum.

Now to address the proposal.  Were the country to divide into two countries, one for conservatives and one for liberals it would not be long at all before those groups discovered differing factions within themselves and split again.  That would, of course, continue to take place until the entire once nation became a collection of little meaningless groupings (countries?) serving no greater purpose in this world than to simply try to accomplish their own survival.

I tend to agree that the original post on this thread in this place serves no purpose but to promote dissention, divide and call upon a fair amount of chest thumping, pot stirring, and intentional aggravation.  What one would choose not to discuss with his disagreeing boss would be a good measure of what and how would be meaningfully discussed here.

As to the comment of no rule requiring a post to be redeeming, all communication should be redeeming in some form.  All.  Communication that has no redeeming value is, by definition, without value or good purpose.  Perhaps we were having trouble with understanding the meaning of redeeming.

I live in Kansas.  There are lots of folks living around me that have political and social values similar to my own.  There are a lot of folks who don't.  I find reason to disagree often and sometimes strongly with the ones with whom I usually agree.  I'm not ready to spilt from the country yet.  Of course, I no longer live in Texas.  I'm at a point I would not be too surprised to see Texas or California go that route.  Did you know that three of the ten most populated cities in the country are in California and three are in Texas (Austin is number eleven)?  

Yeah, what he said......

[The emperor has no clothes]

My first thought.....where is the redeeming quality of this thread? It's sole purpose is to stir the pot. Coming from someone who has been accused of being a troublemaking liberal, I find it to be totally unnecessary and a waste of keystrokes. Even I wouldn't post something like this.

Well, one redeeming thing is that the only name-calling so far is by you and Meathead, you calling yourself a "troublemaking liberal", and Meathead calling himself, well, "Meathead".  Also, inhabitants of coastal states are now more aware of the need to improve their gun-handling and marksmanship skills. 

"so far" ?  Hopefully that's it 

[_Sheffjs_]

It is obviously not a real proposal to consider moreover it is hypothetical and so far this thread has been way more subdued than others you have and I have been involved in. And I stated I was hoping for a simple liberal answer. I genuinely wanted to hear what was said, is that so bad?   Now, I did enjoy and agree with some parts of your reply Willow.  

[Willow]

It is obviously not a real proposal to consider moreover it is hypothetical and so far this thread has been way more subdued than others you have and I have been involved in. And I stated I was hoping for a simple liberal answer. I genuinely wanted to hear what was said, is that so bad?   ...

Yes, the populace has behaved better than they have in some times past.   

...   Now, I did enjoy and agree with some parts of your reply. 

LOL!  You have no idea how encouraging that is to hear.  I do truly enjoy being enjoyed.   

[Moonshot_1]

Wow.....I am truly speechless.
[/quote]


Our work here is done.

[Moonshot_1]

If we're to divide the country into two land sections one for the liberals and one for the conservatives what would be the outcome of each side in the space of one presidential term?   

Before we poo poo this to death, I recalled a Russian Academic presenting a similar scenario, more detailed of course, and based on reality. While his predictions haven't come to pass, the underlying observations are still quite relevant.

Story here

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123051100709638419

[The emperor has no clothes]

If we're to divide the country into two land sections one for the liberals and one for the conservatives what would be the outcome of each side in the space of one presidential term?   

Before we poo poo this to death, I recalled a Russian Academic presenting a similar scenario, more detailed of course, and based on reality. While his predictions haven't come to pass, the underlying observations are still quite relevant.

Story here

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123051100709638419

An Ex-KGB agent has been predicting the disentegration of the USA since the year 2000 ? Yeah there would be no underlying misinformation there. 

[Romeo]

THIS!!!!

Without working people's money to fund the socialism, the socialists would soon be eating each other.  

A quite happy outcome all around.  

The reality show would then be shifted from The Walking Dead, to The Walking Socialists  (which is what the show is really about anyway).

Unfortunately, there is no easy geographic solution.

And to be fair, the Free crap Army isn't really liberal... it just votes for whoever gives them free crap.  Their only actual politics is self interest.   They've learned to parrot the liberal agenda to be part of the team, but if the conservatives gave them more money/benefits than the liberals, they'd learn to parrot the conservative agenda in short order.

Of course, this could never happen since the conservative agenda would never include bankrupting the country to buy the votes of half the population. 

Wow.....I am truly speechless.

well, something good came of all this anyway.

[baldo]

THIS!!!!

Without working people's money to fund the socialism, the socialists would soon be eating each other.  

A quite happy outcome all around.  

The reality show would then be shifted from The Walking Dead, to The Walking Socialists  (which is what the show is really about anyway).

Unfortunately, there is no easy geographic solution.

And to be fair, the Free crap Army isn't really liberal... it just votes for whoever gives them free crap.  Their only actual politics is self interest.   They've learned to parrot the liberal agenda to be part of the team, but if the conservatives gave them more money/benefits than the liberals, they'd learn to parrot the conservative agenda in short order.

Of course, this could never happen since the conservative agenda would never include bankrupting the country to buy the votes of half the population. 

Wow.....I am truly speechless.

well, something good came of all this anyway.

Like my old pal Mark used to say....


“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

― Mark Twain


Oh, was that name calling? I sure am sorry about that. Talk about needing thicker skin.....