Say you live in a blue state.........

[Bouncy Ball]

(this idea was born on another thread and it is PURELY hypothetical, ok?)

Say you live in a blue state and it's 2006 and things have gotten much MUCH worse, especially in the red states. Generally that's all fine and good with you, those mofos deserve it.

Then you hear about a program to help liberal families in red states relocate to blue states. Say the people who put together the program even checked the peoples' voting records to see that they have always voted Dem/independent and they did/do. So they are real, hardcore Democrats, miserable living in red states, but cannot afford to move to a blue state.

If you had the resources, would you sponsor a liberal family to move from a red state to a blue one, or do you think it is more important to keep Democrats everywhere?

Secondary question: what if a liberal family member of yours in a red state called you, asking you for financial help to move to your blue state?

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. Yes to both questions.

Though it would be much easier to just get the people a job in a blue state than to spend the money to sponsor them.

But then again, if it's 2006 there might not be many jobs left.

:-)

As it is now, every dem in an overwhelmingly red state is a wasted vote. Might as well move 'em all into the places where their votes can matter and they can have at least some level of government (local, state) that they agree with.

And then, after the brain drain from the red states, the red ones will really be screwed, especially after Alabama is bought by Texaco and Kentucky by Philip Morris, etc.

[JimmyJazz]

2. I don't care where you live -- I'm more patrioticker than you.

:P

[Rabrrrrrr]

4. End you alwaze will bee!

[JimmyJazz]

5. Damn, Skippy

:)

[Bouncy Ball]

6. So you don't agree

with the "having a presence in all fifty states" theory of getting the Dems back on track?

I am actually grappling with this question. It won't be soon, but in the next ten years we will have a very real chance to move.

I am so torn. On the one hand, Texas was blue not so very long ago and I truly believe it will be again.

On the other hand, we're fucking miserable. The idea of being able to be free to breathe easily, to just be who we are, to not worry about what we are saying and when and who hears it (not that we watch that all that much, but we DO have concealed carry here! LOL!) is just wonderful to me.

I've never even BEEN to a blue state. I have no idea what it must be like to live somewhere where it is assumed you are a Democrat.

So yeah, this is something I'm trying to figure out...on the one hand, I WANT MY STATE BACK DAMMIT and on the other hand, I kinda feel like fuck it.

[Rabrrrrrr]

7. Well, if we want to leave the hypothetical, here's how I feel;

you should live wherever you feel comfortable, have a job and life you like, and are with people who are a good fit for you.

So I would not suggest that a dem stay in a red state just because of some future election possibilities. Nor suggest that a dem stay in a blue state for the same reason.

Go where you want. The politics will take care of itself.

[Bouncy Ball]

9. Hmmm

that sounds like good advice!

Cheers!

:toast:

[tigereye]

36. I am not sure that it really makes that much difference

I live in PA and always have, but I live in a very blue-collar, union oriented city with lots of universities... so it is pretty progressive here. At the same, time, suburbs and rural areas on our state often are much more conservative.

Our state was "blue" this time, but has moved back and forth over the years - so I am not sure if it is a matter of living in the "state" versus the area or region where you live. I also think that we all tend to gravitate toward people who think like we do, but there is also value in people ( be they Republicans or not) or think differently than we do. I worry about "polarization" - I think we are still allowed to like our neighbors even if they did not vote the way we did. ( granted the rabid ones are harder to take!)


I think there is something to be said for staying and fighting for what you love and the values that you hold.

[Allenberg]

37. Sounds alot like Pittsburgh...my parents still live in the suburbs

out in the northeastern corner of Allegheny County.

[tigereye]

39. yup that's where we are

so of course NBC is running a not so progressive blue state/red state piece from here on how grandsons of union presidents have become diehard Republicans. Way to view the complexity, eh?

[Allenberg]

42. Where abouts in Pittsburgh?

My wife is from the North Side, Bellevue.

[tigereye]

43. I'm in Swissvale now

but have lived off and on in the East End... Shadyside, etc. for many years.

[Allenberg]

44. Mmmm.

Swissvale Battleships...hehe

[tigereye]

47. you know I don't know that one

I grew up in Butler County...

[RevolutionaryActs]

3. If we keep the electoral vote, and have all Dems move to already blue

states. There is no way in hell we would EVER win an election again. So no, we need Dem's all over.

We probably need more Dems in red states, but thats a whole other issue.

[AndyTiedye]

17. We Need More DemsTo Keep The Blue States Blue As Long As We Can

States like Ohio and Florida are red because of massive electoral fraud.
Democracy no longer exists there. Better to be somewhere the right
to vote actually means something.

[mitchtv]

8. I am ready to start a foundation to help Gays move

from Jesusland, strait liberals is a good idea. For gays it is urgent .

[Bouncy Ball]

10. I agree.

For gays it is VERY urgent.

I also urge gays to buy guns. NOT if they aren't comfortable with that, obviously, but if they are, I think they should purchase one. For home defense. That's all.

I know that sounds crazy, but I live in Texas. A LOT of gay people are armed here.

[mitchtv]

14. several states should be targeted with advertising

and generous grants to move to CA, VT, MA, NY,NJ and other gay friendly areas. Target states would include VA, OH, OK and AL to start

[On Par]

11. It Would Be Easier For The Red States To Secede!

As things get more difficult as we near 2006 or '08, it will get more difficult everywhere, not just the South. In fact they may be last to feel the pinch. The red states already siphon off the blue states income thanks to the Bush menu of who gets federal funding.

No, my idea is that Abe Lincoln could very well have been wrong. We need to permit the South to secede. If not, we need to isolate them. Why? As bad as things may get, they'll still believe that everything can be solved by either more guns or more Jesus.

OP

[Bouncy Ball]

12. Ok the red states secede

are the blue state people just gonna let their Dem brethren flounder in the red states or would they throw them a lifeline to sanity?

On edit: by the way, repukes wouldn't give a SHIT about repukes in blue states, of that I am sure.

[mitchtv]

16. Secession is illegal

But what about expulsion?

[sandnsea]

13. MUCH worse??

I don't know how MUCH that MUCH really is, in your hypothetical. If it was really bad, I'd imagine we'd be talking more underground than DU and then I'd do whatever it took. I think the Supreme Court is saving us for now, shocking as it is. Unless we have major change there, I'm honestly not worried that it'll get worse on social issues. Economically is a whole other matter.

[Bouncy Ball]

15. Yeah MUCH.

And I meant socially and economically.

You are right, in that case, we would probably be more underground than this public forum.

[AndyTiedye]

18. The Supreme Court Hangs By a Thread

It is Rhenquist, of all people, who are saving our butt for the moment,
but he isn't long for this world. You know what kind of people will
fill any vacancies there.

[sandnsea]

32. Yes I do

Too bad we forgot the Supreme Court with all our liberal purity this summer.

[AndyTiedye]

33. What Liberal Purity?

I must have missed it. Every time I looked, we were pandering further to the right.

[sandnsea]

41. Bitching and moaning the whole way

Yep, most liberal candidate ever who could have appointed Supreme Court justices to protect so many rights for decades. For far too many, their liberal purity was more important than truly seeing we had the best Presidential possibility since JFK.

[greendog]

19. That's a terrible idea...

...it would be much smarter to relocate surplus liberals to sparsely populated red states.

If, for example you moved all the liberal voters from just one good sized county in a liberal blue state to Montana, the Democratic Party could carry the state in the presidential election.

Also, what makes you think rural red state liberals have any desire to move to the crowded blue states? A lot of us live here because we want to.

[Bouncy Ball]

20. Um, ok, well obviously I wasn't speaking for you

AND I said it was all hypothetical, didn't I?

[Thor_MN]

21. Best scenario, Red State Dems move to purple states and turn them Blue.

Either that or the United States of Canada and Jesusland.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

22. If things get much worse, I'll leave my blue state for another country

And yeah...I'd sponsor one of you red state people and give you political asylum as long as I can trade one knuckledragger from this state that really ought to be in a RED state

[Bouncy Ball]

Hey now THERE'S an idea!

A Trade-Off program!

[Wapsie B]

23. I think that if we're going to have

any mass influx of Democrats anywhere it needs to be in the states that are barely red or barely blue, otherwise called the purple states.
If all we do is move people to Illinois or Minnesota in the midwest and California in the west and New York or wherever in the east it doesn't solidify our power. We haven't gained anything. Put those Dems in a purple state and tip the balance to the blue.

[Bouncy Ball]

24. Yep, I agree.

So what states are purple?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

25. Ohio

Florida

[Wapsie B]

26. Ohio for one.

Florida's gotta be close.

Don't know how close Texas would be.

[madinmaryland]

27. "they are real, hardcore Democrats"

I hate hearing the word "hard-core", because to me the only hard-core people are repubs and drug addicts.

But to answer your question, yes.

[Bouncy Ball]

28. ...

To me hardcore just means completely.

But ok.

[madinmaryland]

30. . . .

"hard-core" just has a bad connotation to me. I guess when I hear about "h-c" porn and other references, i don't like it associated with our name, beliefs, and friends.

[Kire]

29. I live in a Blue State.

oh, is there more to this thread than the headline?

I'm getting punchy, tonight.

[Bouncy Ball]

31. ????

Yes, it's in the body of the post.

[huskerlaw]

34. Anyone wanna sponsor me??

I graduate in May and then I'm outta this red-state hell hole. I'm moving either to California (ahhhh, BLUE!) or Nevada (it's purple, more blue would be a happy thing). Either way, I simply must get out of here.

[trogdor]

35. It depends.

Mainly on the general political climate. I'm generally against fleeing your state just because it went Bush, but if things got really worse - I'm talking Civil War worse, I'd be inclined to change my mind.

I'd advise them to dress warmly when they come; it gets cold here in the winter.

On a similar tack, I have conservative family members. Lots of them. Would I discriminate against them? Hell no.

[CarpeVeritas]

38. don't we all have the same president, congress, and supreme court?

what difference does it make whether you live in a "blue" state or a "red" state?

it's mostly all purple anyway.

so to answer your question:
a resounding NO!

[Wapsie B]

40. The thing is,

in order for Dems to tilt the balance toward our side from an electoral standpoint a few strategic shifts in population would make all the difference in the world. With people from the north and east moving south to warmer weather it's going to happen anyway, diluting the repug base in the south. It would just be great to speed up the process a bit.

Yeah we do have the same president, congress and SCOTUS. But I don't feel they represent me at all, only their konservative funders.

[CarpeVeritas]

48. but that would involve "blue-staters" moving to "red" states...

not the other way around.
if dems move from red to blue states, it'll only make the red states more red, and the blue states bluer.

[fujiyama]

45. Have liberals from red states move to purple states

Have liberals from red states move to WI, MI, PA, OH, FL, NH, NV, CO, NM, IA and other states that were pretty close this time.

We need to keep these states blue if we want to have any chance of winning the presidency.

OTOH, this really makes it even more difficult to win senate seats in red states...

[GardeningGal]

46. I live in a red state and there's still hope

At least that's what I keep telling myself.

Here in Colorado we did have some successes in this election. We kept Coors out of the senate, passed two liberal measures (expansion of rapid transit and requiring power companies to get 10% from renewable resources), and voted in a democratic congress (both houses!). That's a first in 44 years.

So, I think we need to keep working on local government and issues and maybe one of these days it will carry over to the presidential election.

[American Tragedy]

49. Well, I'm stuck in red state hell, so I LOVE the idea!

In fact, I've been meaning to post about this exact topic. Would we be better off if we were to relocate to areas where we are more appropriately represented? Neither of my Senators even come close to representing me, nor does my governor.