We need our own state.

Ok, Montana.... That is my choice. I did consider Alaska, but I think we're already considered "fringe" and that only helps bolster that.... but also, people will have a mental block about moving out of the greater 48.

Montana... there are a variety of terrain possibilities to live in. Rapid growth and chances for urbanization that we have the power (through our numbers) to influence.

EDIT: for those that arent reading the whole thread - we need proximity to canada and a state with a lower population
 
FrankRep said:
New Hampshire would probably be the best choice because of the Free State Project.

Liberty > Warm weather (Pains me to say)
Click to expand...

NH is certainly a candidate, but it is close to Boston, lots of military bases, lots and lots of liberals who commute to Boston, and surrounded on three sides...Very small too...crops need space...
 
SteveMartin said:
Reno is a city. We need to decide on a state, but we certainly don't have to do it tonight...
Click to expand...

LOL duh. How many cities are in Nevada? I'm saying Reno because that is right next to Carson City, the state capital and who in their right mind would want to move to Vegas?

It is easier to have influence in numbers in Nevada (especially Carson City area) most other states.
 
Before deciding on Montana, do some research on Yellowstone and the volcanic activity. I don't think that's a safe place.
 
Oh...and RP swept northern Maine. Won both the straw poll and the delegate count outright.

Biggest drawbacks of northern Maine are:

1> Cold
2> Lack of jobs


Positives:

1> Plenty of space for crops
2> Very low population density
3> Surrounded on three sides by Canada
4> Cheapest real estate in the nation
5> Secessionist fervor already exists
 
pinkmandy,

Yes...remote concern, but possibly one to keep in mind. Northern Maine is the safest from all possible natural disasters too. Safest place in the USA if Yellowstone should blow (outside of northern Alaska, or an island somewhere.) Maine has no earthquakes, No hurricanes, very rare tornadoes, no volcanoes. Elevation from 400-5000 feet is high enough for any but the worst mega-tsunami threats.
 
pinkmandy said:
Before deciding on Montana, do some research on Yellowstone and the volcanic activity. I don't think that's a safe place.
Click to expand...

Helena will be in a good spot, then. ;) Montana is HUGE so it's pretty easy to exchange the volcanoes for the tornadoes. :)
 
Steve, I'm leaning towards Maine myself and I hate cold. The geographic location of Maine is perfect, though. And if they're right about global warming, hell, it might warm up a bit, lol.

I watched this docu on Yellowstone awhile back and it startled me. If it were not for that little fear I'd prefer Montana.
 
FYI I believe there are already at least 100,000 people that think like we do in Texas. I think we can reach them all. What needs to happen is we need to take over a city, then a county, then another. We need State Legislators elected, not even a majority really, then bring the motions to the table, get the people behind them. We could start in the area of Austin, which is also the capital. Politics in Texas happen in Austin. It's Texas' DC.

Think about what Texas is and what they believe. Fiercely patriotic to the state of Texas, many of us our Texan's before we are Americans. We're 70% Republican/Conservative, Austin may well be the Libertarian Capital of the world. We have a strong economy, access to ports, both Oil and Natural Gas reserves and wells. We have direct access to Mexico. We also have large Militia movements and are strongly pro 2nd amendment. 1 in 7 are concealed carriers.
 
Again, Texas is far too large and far too surrounded and far too populated. We need to get those 100,000 to join us.

mavtek,

I just don't think we have that kind of time. We need to inundate a small-population state and get out of the D.C.-infested corpse within a year or two at the most. Either McCain or the Dems will start WWIII and we want to be indpendent by then, or well on the way towards it.


nate,

I have seen the maps of projected ash fallout, etc. None of it would reach northern New England, but, of course, the sun being blotted out would be a much larger concern. The point is, you wouldn't die from pyroclastic flows or ash, and you would have time to seek more hospitable locations outside of North America.
 
Last edited:
And in Texas our state legislature meets for only 120 days every 2 years. (I think they got it backwards and it should have been 2 days/120 years.):D

We currently have a candidate for US Senate running on a platform of secession - Larry Kilgore.
 
Now, you're seeing the problem with the Free State project, i.e. getting people to give up their preferences for the sake of liberty. Since New Hampshire has already been selected, realistically only one more state can jump into the fray since the numbers just won't be there initially to secede. The other state needs to be considerably further west.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
Reclaiming Our Sovereignty from State Power
Replies
1
Views
83
TheTexan
TheTexan
PAF
Masters of Our Fate, Captains of Our Souls
Replies
0
Views
146
PAF
PAF
PAF
Independence Day 2025
Replies
14
Views
121
unknown
unknown
PAF
The Fear-Mongering Rackets of the U.S. National-Security State
Replies
0
Views
82
PAF
PAF
PAF
The Threats of AI Come from the State
Replies
7
Views
85
ClaytonB
ClaytonB
Back
Top