191
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 13 points 1 hour ago

If it weren't mainly a rural vs. urban split, I'd be all for the fascists getting their own country to ruin. But we're too spread out to make it feasible.

[-] Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world 10 points 33 minutes ago

Don't threaten me with a good country.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 4 points 25 minutes ago

Can Canada take the coastal states?

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 minutes ago

Yeah, divorce yourself from all those states that send you money because you're too backward to care for yourself. Sounds like a great idea!

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 8 points 2 hours ago

Greene on Monday described these actions as a threat against Trump's "mandate."

That mandate calls for actions Democratic states must accept, Greene argued, such as the mass deportation of "illegal invaders" and preventing trans children from playing sports.

The funny thing is that MTG is getting less and less of a "mandate" from GA-14 for all of her crap: In 2020 she got 74.6 percent of the vote, in 2022 she got 65.9, and in 2024 she got 64.4. Keep it up Marge.

[-] Tyfud@lemmy.world 16 points 1 hour ago

Still way, way, way too high for a white supremacist goblin in human form to get.

[-] Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world 3 points 32 minutes ago

Yeah, but she mainly represents white supremacist goblins in human forms.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 22 minutes ago

They all swore an oath to equal protection under the law. Funny how they can ignore that mandate

[-] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago

A republican flip flopping on states rights again? I'm shocked.

[-] M600@lemmy.world 23 points 6 hours ago

How is it not illegal for her to say these things? Like is that a threat against the United States?

[-] Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world 5 points 30 minutes ago

A known traitor threat against the United States was allowed to run for and be elected president. This country doesn't have laws except for the poor and it certainly doesn't have a functioning system of justice or even government at this point.

[-] NeilBru@lemmy.world 15 points 5 hours ago

Depends.

Protected by the first amendment, one can legally advocate for the dissolution of the Union through bicameral ratification outlined constitutionally. To advocate for armed insurrection or violent overthrow of the federal government is sedition and considered quite illegal.

[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 3 points 45 minutes ago

"illegal" is rather a quaint notion.

[-] MrPoopbutt@lemmy.world 11 points 3 hours ago

Is it really illegal if the law isn't enforced? Is anything a Republican does illegal anymore?

[-] NeilBru@lemmy.world 8 points 1 hour ago

I've always loved this quote about conservatism:

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition: there must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

  • Francis M. Wilhoit
[-] dharmacurious@slrpnk.net 21 points 8 hours ago

Honestly, with what I'm genuinely concerned is going to happen, that would probably be preferable. Give everyone some notice, and we can escape the nutjobs by being homeless in California and New York instead of concentrated in camps in Florida and Georgia. I mean, it'll inevitably make the blue state nation more conservative as they blame southern refugees for all their problems, but it'd still be better more than likely

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 20 minutes ago

The notice is now. I’m getting out of Ohio for that reason.

[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 41 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Don't threaten me with a good time lady.

[-] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 2 points 1 hour ago

Right? The country is split basically 50. This seems like the obvious thing to do.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 27 points 9 hours ago

So they know that Texas doesn't have a GDP high enough to even run all their red catastrophies, right? I'm kidding, I know they don't know. They probably also don't know that CA would be the third largest super power if they ever let us go. Which they won't. At all.

[-] Restaldt@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

California should secede and kick off the great (terrible) balkanization of the formerly united states

NCR & The North East republic

Vs

Yeehawistan

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 18 minutes ago

Unfortunately that would cause a Pakistan-Bangladesh situation with a country connected by airlines. Except worse because Illinois, Minnesota, Colorado, and New Mexico would be enclaves in trumpistan

[-] Draces@lemmy.world 33 points 9 hours ago

Californians are in an abusive relationship. Blamed for everything and not allowed to leave

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

And we pay them more money than we use for ourselves.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 39 points 11 hours ago

I mean... as long as California takes Colorado and New Mexico with it, I see no real issues with that. We get the economy, the nature, and the nukes.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 16 minutes ago

Aren’t the nukes in Montana and the dakotas? Though I’m under the impression we also keep some silos in the rural northeast.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 minute ago

Here is a handy map of some of our nukes as of 2006 https://uploads.fas.org/sites/4/NotebookMap.pdf

But also? The expertise to maintain and build nukes are very much California and New Mexico as that is where the three major NNSA labs and their support facilities are.

[-] ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 9 hours ago
[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 45 minutes ago

Something that I learned recently makes this flag make absolutely no sense.

The bear on the flag of The Republic of California, is extinct, and has been since the 1920s. Therefore in the Fallout universe, that bear is also extinct. None of them could have mutated into the two headed version. Where the heck did this flag come from?

[-] Revan343@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 minutes ago* (last edited 8 minutes ago)

They still would have had the original California flag; the NCR flag would have been based on it, probably to deliberately harken back to the time before the restructuring of the country into the 13 Commonwealths divided the state in two

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
191 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3140 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS