[United States of America]

How about this:



United States of America; indivisible & inseparable
(and hopefully one day this map will include a spot for Puerto Rico)

My Party may tolerate a "states rights" position on the issue in the near future, but will not be able to support gay marriage at least until Millennials (and younger) are the plurality in the GOP primaries.  At that point, you'll probably see a pretty immediate shift.

My girlfriend (who has a sympathetic heartstring for the Lost Cause) asked me (as someone who refers to the confederates as "rebel traitors") how I would ever justify secession if I didn't support the south seceding. 

I answered that secession is only valid if it increases human freedom and progress.  Obviously that's a subjective judgement.  When the US Colonies seceded from Britain, they undoubtedly increased the potential for liberty.  If a secession movement is founded to increase discrimination or limit rights, I believe history will judge it to be morally bankrupt and invalid.

Actually the Democrats, since they're straddling the spectrum from centre-right to far-left and could concievably split.

So basically, if (since) the Republicans made the Party into a far-right, plutocratic organization, it would be healthy for their survival?

Of course not, but a more united party is always more likely to survive.

I wouldn't disagree, but I would make a counter-point.

When movements base themselves around an increasingly extremist ideology where people are unable or unwilling to compromise or tolerate minor differences, they can become more likely to cleave.  We saw this with Communism where you end up with purges and ideological disputes between Marxist-Leninists, Trotskyites, Maoists, etc.  

Thankfully, the GOP hasn't reached the point where there are issue litmus tests to become a candidate or purges of people who don't fit a radical version of the ideology.  Phew!

For those who are voting "HP", I have a question:

Why?

So what happens if there are also sixteen Republicans who refuse to vote for anyone except Boehner?

*crops him out of my photo with him*

Yes (R), which means my time as a 1960's Tennessee Congressman might have been rather short

I am greatly disappointed that we have so many people on this forum who voted "no".  I don't think a "no" vote means someone is a racist.  Yet, a "no" vote on this issue in 1964 was certainly a vote to enable racists to infringe on freedom.

Racial discrimination is by far the greatest threat to individual liberty that has ever been faced by any group of individuals in our country's history.

The federal government was the only agent with the political and logistic capability to attempt to restore that natural liberty.  The freedom for many individuals to be able to gain equal access to prosperity and happiness far outweighs the infringement on the right of a restaurant owner or businessman to discriminate against a man based on his skin pigmentation.

Cuomo shepherds through a historic vote in favor of "marriage equality", yet he is "persona non grata" and just not good enough to even be considered by crazy Dems.

No wonder it is so hard to get elected officials to stand on principle (even if I sometimes disagree with their principles), there just isn't any political gain from it.  One of the Republicans who voted for gay marriage, supported by Cuomo, easily made it through the GOP primary but lost to a Democratic hack.  Lesson to Republicans:  Dont' ever ever ever ever ever vote with Democrats on anything, it will always come to bite you in the a**.  They don't care about principles, only power.

I sympathize with Phil's skepticism about anyone with the last name of Cuomo, but all the evidence I've seen suggests he's the best Democratic Governor in America.

I vehemently oppose NDAA, but I before we all need tissues to clean ourselves up we should point out that all this does is say that Michigan bureaucrats aren't responsible for enforcing federal law.  In other news, the state of Michigan will not enforce the sky being blue.

Option 5

What colour is the Republican sky?

Orange, except its purple when the gays are about.  You mean its not orange for you?

Page 2, along with Emsworth, afleitch, Ben, Harry, Clay, and KEmperor.

That really wasn't the most embarrassing part of this poll, as bad as it is.

If even remotely true, the idea of 44% of Republicans either wanting to secede or being "unsure" is troubling to say the least.

I was at a GOP meeting today and one of the people asking a question of the guest elected official began his question with "Unfortunately, we are apart of the United States".  This is really getting sickening.

When the base of your party is dominated by southern whites whose forebearers likely fought to secede from the Union (and for a manifestly unjust Cause), such sentiments shouldn't surprise anyone.  

That thought is more terrifying - if 25% of Republicans are for secession nationwide, that probably means that its around 10% in New York and... heaven help us what % it is in Mississippi.

In the past few months I've heard more and more relatively conservative Republicans that I never thought would consider leaving the party, looking for the exits.  I'm still holding on to optimism that the madness will exhaust itself someday.

That really wasn't the most embarrassing part of this poll, as bad as it is.

If even remotely true, the idea of 44% of Republicans either wanting to secede or being "unsure" is troubling to say the least.

I was at a GOP meeting today and one of the people asking a question of the guest elected official began his question with "Unfortunately, we are apart of the United States".  This is really getting sickening.

Massive Super-Ultra FF!

In a 3 (or more) way race, its theoretically possible for a candidate to win the election without winning a sub-jurisdiction like a county or precinct - by coming in 2nd everywhere while the other candidates split 1st and 3rd places in different jurisdictions.

Does anyone have any examples of this happening in real life?

Wow, that's incredible!  Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

Visually I prefer the choropleth map (which can be viewed for most states on DRA) but this map more closely resembles population and margin.  (Whereas a national red/blue map by precinct just looks even more disjointed from the results than the county map does, as most rural areas of suburban/urban Obama counties vote GOP)

My favorites: Howard Baker, Winfield Dunn
The greatest: Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk

Perhaps we should diversify our virtually all-white, all-male Forum before we criticize the House GOP.

I'm an African-American male, so that counts toward some diversity on this forum. That said, an internet forum is a little bit different than the House of Representatives.

Sadly, my Party often seems like very little more than an internet forum.  More folks believe what they read in chain e-mails than what they get from legitimate news outlets.

For the record I am nonwhite and gay.  So I am a twofer here and will criticize their lack of diversity.

How many Forum Moderators are women?

Actually I will say I'm a bit miffed at this.

I'm as opposed as anyone to affirmative action, quotas, etc... but its not like these Committee Chairs are based entirely on merit.  I don't think that leadership is going through stacks of resumes of the members.  These are political positions in a political body and there should be some political choices made here.  There are plenty of GOP women who have been in the House for at least 10 years that are more than qualified to be Chairs.

Perhaps we should diversify our virtually all-white, all-male Forum before we criticize the House GOP.

I strongly oppose single-payer, but if my party doesn't put up some sort of workable market solution that covers everyone, a few decades down the road we will end up with it anyway.

Who exactly are the voters who support marijuana legalization but oppose gay marriage to the point of voting to make it illegal?