Should we divide the United States between the north and south?

[Thalian]

The North would be a liberal-aligned nation, and the South would be a conservative-aligned nation. Would our congresses not get more done without the 50% opposition? Would we not have happier people being able to have their president elected. We would be a more stable with our foreign policies (more predictable). We could both run the economies the way we wanted (the North Protectionist probably, the South Free Trade)...


Should we give up our status as a world power to have happier populations?

[Nadev]

Not really, because you would have people in sections of states like Texas or California that would hang themselves.

[Angella]

The U.S. went down this road before. It wasn't 'civil.'

The country is less divided than news agencies and politicians would lead you to believe. Even California has 9 Republicans for every 11 Democrats.

[Asics]

Should we? Probably not, but it would certainly be interesting to see a "what if" kind of show that would showcase the situation. Something like Life After People. That kind of stuff is really intriguing.

[Thalian]

Not really, because you would have people in sections of states like Texas or California that would hang themselves.

They already have the "wrong" local governments. What if it was a system that was used in temporary North/South Vietnam? In Vietnam, the communists were offered free citizenship in the North and the Catholics were offered free citizenship in the South. What if we allowed people to migrate as they wanted for the first five years?

---------- Post added 2013-06-21 at 11:22 PM ----------

The U.S. went down this road before. It wasn't 'civil.'

The country is less divided than news agencies and politicians would lead you to believe. Even California has 9 Republicans for every 11 Democrats.

I mean if it was an agreement between the states.

[steale]

Of course not but it would be funny to see the south implode in two weeks. Also what would fox news do then?

Yep, and MSNBC would have a blast covering the widespread starvation after welfare funding ran out of old southern money to feed it. This game is fun.

[Sky High]

Yep, and MSNBC would have a blast covering the widespread starvation after welfare funding ran out of old southern money to feed it. This game is fun.

yep, since we all know southern states are what is keeping the northern states heads above water. oh wait.

[prwraith]

This idea is so bad you should feel bad for proposing it. Neither side would survive with anywhere near the quality of life they currently have without the other.

[OzoAndIndi]

There's still pockets of liberal/conservative in most states though. My own (small) state could be divided north/south blue/red (or realistically blue/purple) and I'm not in the south.

Unless of course you want to relocate the people in the south part, but they're prob not red enough to suit true southern taste.

[The Penguin]

I have a idea. Let all the Liberals have a free ticket to Mars. We can make a film 100 years from now called Total Reca---Waitaminute.

[Thalian]

This idea is so bad you should feel bad for proposing it. Neither side would survive with anywhere near the quality of life they currently have without the other.

How so? You have no proof other than your pony avatar... and not even that is very convincing, might I say!

There are tiny little countries that can survive just fine (Liechtenstein, Singapore, Monaco, Andorra, San Marino), but two giant countries bigger than any in Europe would collapse?

[Deleted]

I think some ppl died in a war so that doesn't happen.

[Kalyyn]

Woah woah woah... where does this leave Indiana? Most folks here would be dead before they'd be socialists.

---------- Post added 2013-06-22 at 07:01 AM ----------

Of course not but it would be funny to see the south implode in two weeks. Also what would fox news do then?

America went for the better part of 200 years using the same policies the south uses now. May not be your ideal way of life, but historically you're wrong.

[Nadev]

Woah woah woah... where does this leave Indiana? Most folks here would be dead before they'd be socialists.

A few years ago, I would have said you would seceeded, making a third country called PeytonManningstan, but now... I'm not sure.

[Kraenen]

The North would be a liberal-aligned nation, and the South would be a conservative-aligned nation. Would our congresses not get more done without the 50% opposition? Would we not have happier people being able to have their president elected. We would be a more stable with our foreign policies (more predictable). We could both run the economies the way we wanted (the North Protectionist probably, the South Free Trade)...


Should we give up our status as a world power to have happier populations?

conservative = protectionist
liberal = free trade
look up your history...

[Tierbook]

conservative = protectionist
liberal = free trade
look up your history...

North has always been protectionist and the South has always been pro-Free Trade
just so you know

[Deleted]

Yes,true! But you know that the south could kick your ass. You are unarmed.

[Tierbook]

Yes,true! But you know that the south could kick your ass. You are unarmed.

if the last civil war is any indication the South will also have superior generals

[Yvaelle]

if the last civil war is any indication the South will also have superior generals

The north has nuclear launch codes. Come at me, bro


But seriously, it would an absolutely terrible idea. For starters, all the people who make economies work are in the North - which would mean the South gets run by conservatives, nukes would be an upgrade compared to the devastation of unregulated industries.

While the last civil war was divided North/South, it doesn't really make sense in a modern context - more like Coasts vs. Middle.

[Deleted]

Yeah you know that the superior power is on! You get fucked from behind.