11
Comments (10)
sorted by:
3
sewers 3 points ago +3 / -0

Because the government is no longer following the constitution and is picking and choosing which laws to uphold and which to ignore. Multiple other states have now violated election laws with impunity. It does Texas no good to break into multiple states under the same government that is failing the people.

2
Fignugent 2 points ago +2 / -0

you don't seem to understand. they don't need to LEGALLY secede

THEY don't follow the constitution, so why should TEXAS?

1
Rudyard 1 point ago +1 / -0

The Texas legislature voting to do this is about as likely as voting to kill themselves.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
stoic_troll 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's not what the state Constitution says. And besides, Texas would never split up, the shape is too iconic.

0
bowlympicshero 0 points ago +1 / -1

As an anti-Texiter myself, I find this idea more intruiging. But why 4? 5 is a much more round number. 55 states sounds better than 54.

1
LogicalPatriot 1 point ago +1 / -0

Historical precedence. 4 states were what was suggested at the time when the state was considering joining the union. The leadership at the time was pro-slavery and wanted to split the state into 4 separate ones to isolate the western portions of the state which were primarily anti-slavery / abolitionist Germans.

The idea was the rig the electoral college and to slant the senate seats in favor of pro-slavery Democrats by having 2 states be high population pro-slave territories and the remaining two be low population anti-slave territories.

1
bowlympicshero 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ah. I see, but its just historical precedence right? Precedence can be changed. It would be a lot harder to game it that way now what with the way the large metropolitan areas are spread out. Every "state" would have it's own cluster of cancer.

2
LogicalPatriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah I'm pretty sure now it could be changed pretty handedly. 4 states still make sense to me during to trying to keep populations remotely close.

IMO it could still be North Texas, East Texas, Coastal Texas and West Texas. West Texas would be by far the largest territory and include San Antonio at a border's edge and stretch from Lubbock to El Paso. Austin would be the primary pop center for East at border and stretch to the Sabine. North would be dominated by DFW and go up to Amarillo while Coastal would be from Brownsville through Houston all the way to Port Author and Beaumont.

I can think of a few other combos but of you want my blunt opinion? Texas should NOT secede nor should it be broken up.

If either happened, Dems take over bu default. Texas seeding takes a fuckton of electoral votes with it that GOP / Conservatives rely on and if Texas split up? The split would justifiably argued around the balance major cities, which would likely result in 3 of those 4 territories going Blue. I think we can agree we don't want either.

1
bowlympicshero 1 point ago +1 / -0

At least someone else around here can think critically. Thank God. I've been saying the same thing. /#NoTexit