A question for the americans on this forum

[theGenius]

so i was hoping the U.S citizens here could help me out understand your contry a bit better
there was just a docu about texas on tv, and how some of its people still view it as an independent state. and this left me with a fundamental question, not about texas but about the U.S in general.
why not have two contries?
because, from my limited insight from europe into the situation in the U.S it seems alot like politics in the U.S are heavily polarized between democracts and republicans, and the two seem a long way apart. and it seems like republican politicians are throwing alot of stones in obamas way right now blocking decicions just to make him look bad. and they generally seem to sabotage each other whenever possible. and in the end all of the contry loses because of this internal power struggel. a very big example: the next republican candidate will prolly get rid of obamacare at ones. that would mean alot of money, effort and time wasted for nothing. i cant think of any proper working contry where political opinions are so polarized between two sides as in the U.S
so here is what i dont understand: while each side trys to convince the other that their way is the right one, noone seems to simply acknowledge their differences with each other and say: fine, instead of constantly wasting resources on fighting each other why not make 2 contries, 1 fore the democrats and 1 for the more consevatives, that way both sides could apply there policies way more efficient and not leave almost 50% of the contry hating the current president (i know that is exaggerated but u get my point) . and this would even work geopolitically since its mostly split between north and south.
most of u.s politics i hear here in europe is either conservatives hating obamas guts or democrats ranting about "rednecks" so whats keeping the U.S united? cause clearly splitting the U.S is not a discussion...

thanks for any heads up explaining this to me, and giving your opinions. the U.S is a complicated place lol

 

[NickHouston]

I personally think what need is to drop the "parties" and go independent only. All the parties to is split the country. On top of that, you have people that will ONLY vote republican if they're republican and ONLY vote democrat if they're democrat. It doesn't matter who the better candidate is to these guys.

Also, having only independent politics might make it so that both sides stop hating each other for the sole purpose of being on opposite sides.

Also, these past few elections have not been a "Who is the best candidate?", it's been more of a "Who will suck less."

 

[Kreubs]

Truth be told, Obama doesn't even need stones to be thrown at him to make bad decisions...

The US used to have more parties, but they either died out or merged with each other. Now we have this mess.

If things keep going they the way they are, I don't see a country the size it is now. Give it 10-15 years. If it broke once, it could break again.

 

[Cryogenic Flare]

If things keep going they the way they are, I don't see a country the size it is now. Give it 10-15 years. If it broke once, it could break again.

Actually there's an amendment that prohibits the recession of a state, if a state does they are subject to military invasion a they are taking over U.S. soil.

It was the first President, George Washington, who said "The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissention, which in different ages & countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders & miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security & repose in the absolute power of an Individual: and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty."

basically if the U.S. is divided into parties, noting will be accomplished.

 

[Maccabeus]

Texas has what I like to call a large ego.. kind of like someone compensating for body proportions with a large truck... Anyways it would never stand for the U.S to split it is hard enough to elect one person who isn't a moron much less two different forms of democracy to elect two people who aren't idiots. Then you would have to deal with extremists on both sides likely be some sort of border made where they will stay then riots would eventually break out doubt it would ever work out well

 

[Cryogenic Flare]

I showed this dad because he is quite knowledgeable in this topic, he said
"This was tried 150yrs ago, it resulted in the civil war. People died to keep the country together, and we're not about to let that happen again. And while the country is divided politically, it's not divide on geographic lines. While it may seem than the difference between is big. It's not really."

So yea, he's smarts and things

 

[SteelHorse]

Does Texas have the legal right to secession? I don't believe they do.

I believe for secession to be able to work several states, for example the original 13 confederate states, would have to secede at the same time. I don't believe Texas alone would be able to make it very far.

I just wish the confederate states had won the civil war to begin with. I'm sure I'll get a lot of shit from that comment. I still don't care for the northern states and would never move up there. If more than just Texas seceded I would deff be for it. I really doubt that will ever happen however.

 

[Maccabeus]

I believe 11 states had appealed to seced not that long ago started by Texas. However Texas is rumoured to be one of the few states that could secede and be self sufficient.

 

[jasmine]

Does Texas have the legal right to secession? I don't believe they do.

I believe for secession to be able to work several states, for example the original 13 confederate states, would have to secede at the same time. I don't believe Texas alone would be able to make it very far.

I just wish the confederate states had won the civil war to begin with. I'm sure I'll get a lot of shit from that comment. I still don't care for the northern states and would never move up there. If more than just Texas seceded I would deff be for it. I really doubt that will ever happen however.

I'm not American but I'd like to know why you wanted to win the South? Let speak of slavery. I guess this is not the topic! why a victory for you (South) would do well to states now forming the united states, who were able to show the world a power never match these xix xx xxi centuries. would like to know, in order to better understand the American peoples
thank you.

 

[miniCyb3r]

Personally, I don't support any side of the parties. (Dem, Rep, conservatives.) The Dems only care about control and power. The Reps only care about money. And the conservatives are all talk. If the conservatives actually did something rather than saying what needs to be done, I would lean towards them. If the country were to split, like they did for the Civil War, there will probably be another civil war. The Obamacare crap would have been fine if he would have kept his promise and let people keep their insurance and didn't force it. When it failed, he decided to make it mandatory for people to have. I won't touch it because it has things involved that I do not support and will never support. I believe this nation will never get fixed. It will never get to what it once was. Nations rise and fall. It's inevitable.

 

[NickHouston]

@miniCyb3r The Republicans ARE the conservatives lol. And I think you've accurately described each party.

Democrats:
"We want more power. How do you get more power? Make people rely on you for even the essentials of life. Never give the less forunate a chance to get out of our grasp, and if they slip through, they deserve to beg on the streets. And look how diverse we are! We totally aren't doing this for the minority vote."

Republicans:
"Look at all my money, guys! Look at me! I SAID LOOK! I helped the needy so you should help me. I create your jobs, thats why I should pay less taxes and make the most money. This country should be run to help every rich, white, Christian male. It was founded that way and that is how we need to keep it."

Both parties:
"Give me bribes and I'll do whatever you want. Did I say bribes? I meant donations, I swear!"

I am ashamed to even be registered to vote, to be honest. I'm registering "independent" once mine expires.

 

[miniCyb3r]

@NickHouston The conservatives are the ones who want a smaller government and less government control. They may be the same, but they aren't as prideful. They are like a sub-genre of the Republican.[DOUBLEPOST=1397593444][/DOUBLEPOST]Oh, and lower taxes.

 

[theGenius]

thanks for interesting comments, but yet i feel noone really commented on the original question, why a 2 nation option never has been considered or talked about amongs the people? and what it is that keeps such a giant but polarized nation together?

the way i see it technically the conservative states should be in favor of getting rid of the "socialist anti-freedome democrats" and the democrats should be happy to get rid of the " backward redneck republicans" a split between southern states like mississippi kentucky texas etc. vs the nothern states in favor of democrats seems so logical. i think last vote there was some 70%in some southern states for republicans and the opposite in the north.

 

[NickHouston]

thanks for interesting comments, but yet i feel noone really commented on the original question, why a 2 nation option never has been considered or talked about amongs the people? and what it is that keeps such a giant but polarized nation together?

the way i see it technically the conservative states should be in favor of getting rid of the "socialist anti-freedome democrats" and the democrats should be happy to get rid of the " backward redneck republicans" a split between southern states like mississippi kentucky texas etc. vs the nothern states in favor of democrats seems so logical. i think last vote there was some 70%in some southern states for republicans and the opposite in the north.

The way I see it, if after every disagreement the two sides broke up, there wouldn't be ANY marriages or relationships.[DOUBLEPOST=1397595344][/DOUBLEPOST]Also, not everyone in every state has the same political views, think of how unfair it would be to, say, my family. We live in a "blue" state and I have a republican father and idk what my mom is. My dad would have to leave in order to get his opinion to actually matter for something.

Now on top of that, I would have to start a third country where everyone would have their own opinion heard.

The cool thing about America(before political corruption due to money and big business) is that we are supposed to all have our opinion heard. The bad part of America is that we don't really have that anymore. The businesses bribe the politicians to do what they want, 16 year old can go drunk driving and kill four innocent people and only get probation and a state-payed vacation at a rehab center if his daddy is rich and can buy the judges, and the "electoral college" are the people that actually vote for the president, not the citizens.

America has went from the "Land of Opportunity" to the "Land of the Rich".

 

[TheDude]

wacko.

 

[SteelHorse]

I'm not American but I'd like to know why you wanted to win the South? Let speak of slavery. I guess this is not the topic! why a victory for you (South) would do well to states now forming the united states, who were able to show the world a power never match these xix xx xxi centuries. would like to know, in order to better understand the American peoples
thank you.

The civil war wasn't about slavery. Abraham Lincoln was loosing and needed a rallie so he made up the emancipation proclamation. He didn't care about whether there were slaves or not. He just needed to give his troops a reason to keep fighting and he used slavery to get what he wanted. You would need a couple college courses to compeatly understand the whole thing. If the south had of won we would prolly have the split nation that Take is talking about. Socialist liberals would be in the north, and conservative republicans would be in the south.

 

[jasmine]

The civil war wasn't about slavery. Abraham Lincoln was loosing and needed a rallie so he made up the emancipation proclamation. He didn't care about whether there were slaves or not. He just needed to give his troops a reason to keep fighting and he used slavery to get what he wanted. You would need a couple college courses to compeatly understand the whole thing. If the south had of won we would prolly have the split nation that Take is talking about. Socialist liberals would be in the north, and conservative republicans would be in the south.

hello Steelhorse
I knew that the war of secession was not as the origin of slavery, which is why I did not want to broach the subject.
you did not answer me directly to my question but anyway I understand why you would want this to be the South wins. it is your political point of view and I respect. what surprises me is that the U.S. (a country that I love) remains strongly cleave (north-south). this is not how we present it to the U.S. (especially in Europe). last question what city you live?
thank you for your answer[DOUBLEPOST=1397669590][/DOUBLEPOST]

@miniCyb3r The Republicans ARE the conservatives lol. And I think you've accurately described each party.

Democrats:
"We want more power. How do you get more power? Make people rely on you for even the essentials of life. Never give the less forunate a chance to get out of our grasp, and if they slip through, they deserve to beg on the streets. And look how diverse we are! We totally aren't doing this for the minority vote."

Republicans:
"Look at all my money, guys! Look at me! I SAID LOOK! I helped the needy so you should help me. I create your jobs, thats why I should pay less taxes and make the most money. This country should be run to help every rich, white, Christian male. It was founded that way and that is how we need to keep it."

Both parties:
"Give me bribes and I'll do whatever you want. Did I say bribes? I meant donations, I swear!"

I am ashamed to even be registered to vote, to be honest. I'm registering "independent" once mine expires.

hi nick
I appreciate what you post. in europe we are very surprised that this is the one that raises the most money (for the electoral campaign) has the best chance of winning. this is not a very democratic method. I applauded you when you talk about bribe because it has what I think too. does not prevent that the USA is a great country. young but very rich in its culture and the different components "ethnic"
god bless america

 

[SteelHorse]

@jasmine: I live in San Antonio, or close enough to it.

 

[Nikon]

This is one area where many Americans have differing opinions. (My dad has known some people who won't talk to him anymore because he doesn't think the south should have won.)

I consider myself to be very conservative, yet I do not believe that the south should have won. They simply had no way to sustain a large enough army for a long enough time to combat the Union. The South thought that if they could get enough decisive victories, they could break the northern fighting spirit. (The Union suffered more casualties than the South) They had no way to win a prolonged war, but that's what the Union gave them.

The Union had the production centers, the population base, and the superior Navy. The South relied on farming and cotton exports for much of its economy and when they were completely blockaded by the Union, they had no more economy. The South also lacked the population base to effectively counter the Union, and since most of their economy, and military for that matter, was made up of farmers, they got hurt even more the longer the war went on. The South did have superior officers compared to most of their Northern counterparts but their armies were ill equipped, under trained, and under fed, relying mostly on captured equipment. The Southern central government was also very weak. (I may be wrong on some of these things so correct me if I'm wrong.)

Had the South won, America may have ended up with another civil war at some point, and the nation most likely would not have been strong enough to assist during World War I, or even World War II... And we'd probably be speaking German or Japanese right now.

So slavery may or may not have been the real reason for the war, but Lincoln was right about one thing, "A house divided against it's self can not stand." That is why the Union had to win, which they did. A divided nation, even if at peace, would not have survived. This remains true today, if we do not get over our petty political differences and unite as Americans once again, we will not stand.

 

[Cryogenic Flare]

The civil war wasn't about slavery. Abraham Lincoln was loosing and needed a rallie so he made up the emancipation proclamation. He didn't care about whether there were slaves or not.

Steel, I apologize for this but, that is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard.
The whole civil war was because seven southern state wanted to continue slavery and introduce it in the west. It is true however that it abolishing slavery wasn't Abe's primary goal, as reuniting America was, it was an additional one that was still high on his list.
Regardless

It's incredibly hard to compare the democrats and republican in current times with those from post-civil war. If you paid deep attention to politics at that time, one would notice that the parties have actually switched ideas.

@theGenius , as for what you said about splitting up the country. Whether or not we do indeed half America, It's it true that there are democrats in the south and republicans in the north? We're wasting money on the fact that nothing can be accomplished. If memory serves the republicans control the "House of Representatives" and nothing gets passed from a democrat unless it's passed by a majority vote in each that, and vice-vesa
However this can explain it much better than I can

[DOUBLEPOST=1397695155][/DOUBLEPOST]different ideas on laws are the main reason for the chasm that separates our country.