Possibility for Second American Civil War

[Thermodolia]

I would. I would be willing to do anything to keep the US whole. But then again I’m not the majority of the US

Out of curiosity, why? If your life was being made worse by the current political system, why not want another? The American Revolution wasn't purely emotional. It was also a logical response to higher taxes and less representation. That could easily happen in modern America and many people talk about Washington as if it's as foreign as London.

Because I signed the dotted line to give my life away to my country. I love my country and would do anything to protect her, even if that means dying

[Thermodolia]

I would. I would be willing to do anything to keep the US whole. But then again I’m not the majority of the US

Even in that case what's best ? A divided but mostly intact country ? Or a united but utterly devastated one ?

The United one. We can rebuild, we have done it before

[Big Jim P]

An actual civil war is unlikely. The leftists might up their violence, eventually running into someone who will shoot them in self defense. That would be about the worst, a few skirmishes.

Come to think of it, a few skirmishes would be just about all even if the leftists ramped it up to a full on war.

[Thermodolia]

An actual civil war is unlikely. The leftists might up their violence, eventually running into someone who will shoot them in self defense. That would be about the worst, a few skirmishes.

Come to think of it, a few skirmishes would be just about all even if the leftists ramped it up to a full on war.

Honestly any civil war would devolve almost immediately into guerrilla warfare. As the US military would utterly crush any resistance.

Also not even all of the leftists would join this rebellion. I certainly wouldn’t, then again I’m a nationalist

[Valrifell]

An actual civil war is unlikely. The leftists might up their violence, eventually running into someone who will shoot them in self defense. That would be about the worst, a few skirmishes.

Come to think of it, a few skirmishes would be just about all even if the leftists ramped it up to a full on war.

Honestly any civil war would devolve almost immediately into guerrilla warfare. As the US military would utterly crush any resistance.

Also not even all of the leftists would join this rebellion. I certainly wouldn’t, then again I’m a nationalist

The fun part comes when/if the US military breaks in half one way and the other.

[Internationalist Bastard]

An actual civil war is unlikely. The leftists might up their violence, eventually running into someone who will shoot them in self defense. That would be about the worst, a few skirmishes.

Come to think of it, a few skirmishes would be just about all even if the leftists ramped it up to a full on war.

Honestly any civil war would devolve almost immediately into guerrilla warfare. As the US military would utterly crush any resistance.

Also not even all of the leftists would join this rebellion. I certainly wouldn’t, then again I’m a nationalist

Thing is I don’t think it’d just be liberals
How many conservative militias in the country have literally been training to fight the government?

[Thermodolia]

Honestly any civil war would devolve almost immediately into guerrilla warfare. As the US military would utterly crush any resistance.

Also not even all of the leftists would join this rebellion. I certainly wouldn’t, then again I’m a nationalist

Thing is I don’t think it’d just be liberals
How many conservative militias in the country have literally been training to fight the government?

Well the original post said nothing about liberals. It would be the extremists on both sides who would be fighting

[Painisia]

A civil war in my opinion is a bit unlikely. Most Americans only care about grilling their BBQ, watching Kim Kardashian and driving their Chevrolets. But there is a possibility that polarization will reach to an extent where armed conflict is inevitable

[Thermodolia]

Honestly any civil war would devolve almost immediately into guerrilla warfare. As the US military would utterly crush any resistance.

Also not even all of the leftists would join this rebellion. I certainly wouldn’t, then again I’m a nationalist

The fun part comes when/if the US military breaks in half one way and the other.

The US military has a greater chance of established a coup of the government than spitting up and fighting eachother

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

An actual civil war is unlikely. The leftists might up their violence, eventually running into someone who will shoot them in self defense. That would be about the worst, a few skirmishes.

Come to think of it, a few skirmishes would be just about all even if the leftists ramped it up to a full on war.

This kinda attitude of "lol we would kick there ass" is self destructive.

Not everyone would be fighting. And where where there is fighting, you would be fleeing. War isn't a game.

You are glossing over the parts where civvies like you would be dieing, being raped, kept as slaves, and other horrible war crimes.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Thing is I don’t think it’d just be liberals
How many conservative militias in the country have literally been training to fight the government?

Well the original post said nothing about liberals. It would be the extremists on both sides who would be fighting

Exactly what I think

[Internationalist Bastard]

An actual civil war is unlikely. The leftists might up their violence, eventually running into someone who will shoot them in self defense. That would be about the worst, a few skirmishes.

Come to think of it, a few skirmishes would be just about all even if the leftists ramped it up to a full on war.

This kinda attitude of "lol we would kick there ass" is self destructive.

Not everyone would be fighting. And where where there is fighting, you would be fleeing. War isn't a game.

You are glossing over the parts where civvies like you would be dieing, being raped, kept as slaves, and other horrible war crimes.

Don’t forget the likely mass killings

[Valrifell]

This kinda attitude of "lol we would kick there ass" is self destructive.

Not everyone would be fighting. And where where there is fighting, you would be fleeing. War isn't a game.

You are glossing over the parts where civvies like you would be dieing, being raped, kept as slaves, and other horrible war crimes.

Don’t forget the likely mass killings

Again, most posters have no idea what actual war is like and have the weird romanticized "Nazis had cool uniforms" version of it.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Don’t forget the likely mass killings

Again, most posters have no idea what actual war is like and have the weird romanticized "Nazis had cool uniforms" version of it.

What’s more is this probably going to be more like the wars in Africa. A central government, a bunch of radical rebels murdering people in the hills. All we need a mosque getting blown up and if feel right at home

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Don’t forget the likely mass killings

Again, most posters have no idea what actual war is like and have the weird romanticized "Nazis had cool uniforms" version of it.

When media oversaturated violence, that what happens. They think it's like COD, where the bad guys are bad, and the good guys are good. No mass killing. No war crimes. Everything is happy go lucky.

The realty is, war is worse then hell.

[Ifreann]

Out of curiosity, why? If your life was being made worse by the current political system, why not want another? The American Revolution wasn't purely emotional. It was also a logical response to higher taxes and less representation. That could easily happen in modern America and many people talk about Washington as if it's as foreign as London.

Because I signed the dotted line to give my life away to my country. I love my country and would do anything to protect her, even if that means dying

It's hard to believe that you love your country when you also want to tear up its foundations, overthrow its government, and bend its people to your will.

[Conserative Morality]

Because I signed the dotted line to give my life away to my country. I love my country and would do anything to protect her, even if that means dying

It's hard to believe that you love your country when you also want to tear up its foundations, overthrow its government, and bend its people to your will.

Sometimes that's the only way forward.

[Liriena]

A second civil war is just something LARPing far right cunts fantasize about when their smooth brains can't tolerate the existence of people who don't buy into their delusional circle-jerk.

You can express disagreements with opinions or approaches without going over the line. *** Warned for Trolling ***

Alright then :/

[Olerand]

Not many Americans in general are willing to live the lifestyle required to maintain and win the war, that would mean severely upsetting or outright destroying the way of life many people have become accustomed to which would most likely be unacceptable to the vast majority of people.

There's lots of talk here, but yeah, who's ready to give up one's way of life to live in a devastated country, without running water, without electricity, where the old US would be a dream and entire part of the country would have turned into third-world shitholes ? Because that's what a generalized civil war in a modern country would look like. No one wants that.

Well, no one wants that (except for a few), but more of one side is willing to endure that than the other.

He stated, in no uncertain terms in 2016 that he would not automatically concede the results of the election, as he believes them to be potentially rigged if he were to lose.

And yet, 46% of the 55% of Americans who voted voted for him. Is that polling not enough?

But only a fraction of that actually supports him enough to do that. And it currently hovers around 30%

30% of 46% of 55%? If so, that is indeed a tiny number that no one need concern themselves with.

But, no, it is 30% or so of individuals polled in a representative survey. That is 30% of 100%. That is one third of your country, willing to refuse your electoral results.
Though, yet again, 70% of Americans always assert in those surveys that they are sure to vote in the elections, while the turnout is, as we all know, much much lower.

But you asked if there was a poll. When he was a candidate, he refused to automatically concede, which is not a hallmark, but a given, a must of our liberal democracies of the 21st century. And yet, he received 46% of the 55% who voted.

This phenomenon does not occur anywhere else, and had he been the head of UKIP in Britain, or the FN in France (which would necessitate an absolute decay of the political cultures of both countries first), and he said what he said, he would not have received the support he did, and certainly not won.

Actually it is not a must to Automatically concede.

It's expected and it's seen as the decent thing to do in American politics, but no it's not necessary, nor is it a given.

46% of 55% in a liberal democracy voted for a man who said he would not concede.

Who else could they have voted for, Hillary?

By that point in the election Trump had already been caught saying and doing things even worse than refusing to concede... yet people voted for him anyway.

If they had taken umbridge and refused to have voted because of that the only thing that would have happened would that the Liberal Democracy would have given them is a President that likely would have made the hatred towards Obama look tiny.

I still go by the thought that the reason a lot of the people voted for Trump not because they liked or agreed with his many many many hostile statements, of which refusing to concede was literally just another footnote of, but because they could not stand the thought of Hillary becoming President.

Though this poll is interesting in that there might have been a growing belief that the 2016 elections could be Rigged among some on the right (And a minority on the left too...)
https://www.prri.org/research/poll-1950 ... -election/

Confidence in the Electoral Process

Fewer than half (43%) of the public say they have a great deal of confidence that their vote will be counted accurately. Roughly four in ten (38%) Americans report having only some confidence, while close to one in five (17%) say they have little confidence their vote will be accurately counted. There are stark differences among likely voters, with 70% of Clinton supporters—but only 41% of Trump supporters—reporting a great deal of confidence their votes will be counted accurately.

Americans are almost evenly divided over what constitutes the more significant problem with U.S. elections today: People casting votes who are not eligible (37%) or eligible voters being denied the right to vote (41%). Roughly one in ten (9%) Americans volunteer that voter apathy is the most significant problem.

Roughly two-thirds (66%) of Republicans believe voter fraud is a bigger problem than voter disenfranchisement, compared to only 19% of Democrats. More than six in ten (62%) Democrats say eligible voters being denied access is the bigger problem facing the election system.

A majority (57%) of Americans agree politics and elections are controlled by people with money and by big corporations so it doesn’t matter if they vote, compared to roughly four in ten (42%) who disagree.

Interesting that the majority actually seems to believe that elections are pointless because money controls everything... that's a pretty dim view of liberal democracy... though I can't say it's not partly accurate.

But it is. Can you give me another example of a candidate in your modern liberal democracy who has refused to concede? Even Jean-Marie Le Pen was willing to concede in 2002, though yet again, he knew he could never win.

So, according to those polls again, quite a few on the American far-right were already questioning the results of the election. Before it was even finished. Though, suddenly, there was no question of the results once their candidate had won.

Seems like an attitude that is very detrimental to liberal democracy.

[The Parkus Empire]

I think it is quite possible, but it wouldn't be over secession.

[The Serbian Empire]

There's lots of talk here, but yeah, who's ready to give up one's way of life to live in a devastated country, without running water, without electricity, where the old US would be a dream and entire part of the country would have turned into third-world shitholes ? Because that's what a generalized civil war in a modern country would look like. No one wants that.

Well, no one wants that (except for a few), but more of one side is willing to endure that than the other.

But only a fraction of that actually supports him enough to do that. And it currently hovers around 30%

30% of 46% of 55%? If so, that is indeed a tiny number that no one need concern themselves with.

But, no, it is 30% or so of individuals polled in a representative survey. That is 30% of 100%. That is one third of your country, willing to refuse your electoral results.
Though, yet again, 70% of Americans always assert in those surveys that they are sure to vote in the elections, while the turnout is, as we all know, much much lower.

Actually it is not a must to Automatically concede.

It's expected and it's seen as the decent thing to do in American politics, but no it's not necessary, nor is it a given.


Who else could they have voted for, Hillary?

By that point in the election Trump had already been caught saying and doing things even worse than refusing to concede... yet people voted for him anyway.

If they had taken umbridge and refused to have voted because of that the only thing that would have happened would that the Liberal Democracy would have given them is a President that likely would have made the hatred towards Obama look tiny.

I still go by the thought that the reason a lot of the people voted for Trump not because they liked or agreed with his many many many hostile statements, of which refusing to concede was literally just another footnote of, but because they could not stand the thought of Hillary becoming President.

Though this poll is interesting in that there might have been a growing belief that the 2016 elections could be Rigged among some on the right (And a minority on the left too...)
https://www.prri.org/research/poll-1950 ... -election/



Interesting that the majority actually seems to believe that elections are pointless because money controls everything... that's a pretty dim view of liberal democracy... though I can't say it's not partly accurate.

But it is. Can you give me another example of a candidate in your modern liberal democracy who has refused to concede? Even Jean-Marie Le Pen was willing to concede in 2002, though yet again, he knew he could never win.

So, according to those polls again, quite a few on the American far-right were already questioning the results of the election. Before it was even finished. Though, suddenly, there was no question of the results once their candidate had won.

Seems like an attitude that is very detrimental to liberal democracy.

Roy Moore refused to concede even though the state of Alabama ruled he lost to Doug Jones. Trump endorsed the stubborn Moore and is about as obsessed with power as Roy Moore is.

[The Serbian Empire]

Honestly any civil war would devolve almost immediately into guerrilla warfare. As the US military would utterly crush any resistance.

Also not even all of the leftists would join this rebellion. I certainly wouldn’t, then again I’m a nationalist

Thing is I don’t think it’d just be liberals
How many conservative militias in the country have literally been training to fight the government?

Many, every state seems to have at least one.

[The Parkus Empire]

Honestly any civil war would devolve almost immediately into guerrilla warfare. As the US military would utterly crush any resistance.

Also not even all of the leftists would join this rebellion. I certainly wouldn’t, then again I’m a nationalist

Thing is I don’t think it’d just be liberals
How many conservative militias in the country have literally been training to fight the government?

>implying much of the military wouldn't be on the conservative side

[Thermodolia]

Again, most posters have no idea what actual war is like and have the weird romanticized "Nazis had cool uniforms" version of it.

What’s more is this probably going to be more like the wars in Africa. A central government, a bunch of radical rebels murdering people in the hills. All we need a mosque getting blown up and if feel right at home

Which is why I’d say it would be guerrilla warfare

[Thermodolia]

Thing is I don’t think it’d just be liberals
How many conservative militias in the country have literally been training to fight the government?

>implying much of the military wouldn't be on the conservative side

I think the vast majority of the military would play keeper of the peace and not get involved on either side