Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 32

Thread: Here are states we can easily take over.

  1. #1

    Default Here are states we can easily take over.

    And when I say take over I mean have complete control of the legislative process in that state.

    So what states are these??

    Alaska
    Delaware
    Idaho
    Kansas
    Maine
    Mississippi
    Montana
    New Hampshire
    North Dakota
    Rhode Island
    South Dakota
    Vermont
    West Virginia
    Wyoming


    Why these states you may ask?? Simple, it's all based on Representatives and Senators ratio to the population. Example: In a state with 5 million, if that state has 100 state representatives, it has a representative to population ratio of 50,000.

    What's our goal? Ultimately to get the lowest ratio possible. Why do that? You have the best chance of persuading a smaller community with limited funds. The smaller the ratio, the less funds you would need, the less effort, the less of a "politician" you need to be, etc.

    Here are the ratios of the states I mentioned:

    Alaska: House: 16,700 (40) Senate: 33,500 (20)
    Delaware: House: 20,800 (41) Senate: 40,600 (21)
    Idaho: House: 21,400 (70) Senate: 42,800 (35)
    Kansas: House: 22,400 (125) Senate: 70,000 (40)
    Maine: House: 8,600 (151) Senate: 37,100 (35)
    Mississippi: House: 23,700 (122) Senate: 55,800 (52)
    Montana: House: 9,400 (100) Senate: 18,800 (50)
    New Hampshire: House: 3,200 (400) Senate: 54,100 (24)
    North Dakota: House: 6,700 (94) Senate: 13,500 (47)
    Rhode Island: House: 13,300 (75) Senate: 26,300 (38)
    South Dakota: House: 11,200 (70) Senate: 22,300 (35)
    Vermont: House: 4,100 (150) Senate: 20,800 (30)
    West Virginia: House: 18,000 (100) Senate: 53,000 (34)
    Wyoming: House: 8,500 (60) Senate: 17,100 (30)

    (x) = Number of representatives or senators.

    It's important to note the average ratio of all the states for the House is around 75,000. The Senate around 150,000. That's what makes these states stand out.


    I believe most of these states you have to be a resident of the state for around 3-4 years and a resident of the district for a year to be eligible to run. So that means get to it!
    Last edited by Nate K; 02-27-2008 at 03:20 PM.
    For good times, IM me.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Montana. It is beautiful and has a small population.

    You can't do this with big states like Texas, California, Florida and New York. You need a state where a couple of hundred thousand voting-age Ron Paul supporters could form a voting majority.

    You then vote in the people you want. Maybe even start a new political party and get them elected. Finally the state legislature, where the "one Montana" party (or whatever the hell you'd call it) and a group of Ron Paul republicans holds a majority, votes to secede.

    Victory!
    Last edited by RonPaulFanInGA; 02-27-2008 at 12:57 PM.

  4. #3

  5. #4

    Default

    Mississippi has a strong independent streak.

    But I agree that Montana seems to be the easiest target, and they're already talking succession!

  6. #5

    Default

    Thanks for the comments gentlemen, I too love Montana. We should focus on it. But let's not forget the other states!
    For good times, IM me.

  7. #6

    Default

    Bump
    For good times, IM me.

  8. #7

    Default

    Since you put NH house in bold, you should put Montana's senate in bold.
    [edit] WOW. read that link that an above poster put up.


    A few days ago on one of the FSP discussion groups I mentioned that in 56 years (almost 57 years) I have lived (for sixty days or more) in 89 communities in every state between the Hundredth Meridian and the Sierra Nevada Mountains (except Nebraska and North Dakota). As a teenager I was interested in freedom and in seeking a place and way for achieving it. As early as 1962 I researched the advantages of secession. Thus, my interest in things relating to the primary goal of the Free State Project is long-standing. I have given, over the past forty years, considerable thought to the subject.

    My years of contemplation and research have led me to a conclusion about which state is most amenable to the Jeffersonian concepts of independence, limited government, and liberty. That state would be Montana. Indeed, if freedom alone is the primary objective, no other state comes close.

    My choice of Montana is not based so much on collected statistical data as on subjective reality (Transcendentalism Lives!). Since my childhood I have been in and out of Montana many times (living in other states). I currently - for the past two years - have lived in Idaho. One thing that I and freedom loving Montanans notice when forced to live away from Montana is the much higher level of statism, coercion (governmental and social), regulation, etc. that exists in other states. In some states the heavy hand of government is more pronounced (WA, OR, TX, KS, CA). In other states not so much (NV, ID, and WY). However, in all states the degree of liberty seems much less than in Montana. Most Montanans that move away mention this reduction of liberty ("We have to behave here; for, we're not in Montana any more, etc.). I've noticed that even my use of language seems restricted outside of Montana.

    Liberty Indicators:

    * Small Police Force

    One thing that visitors notice when visiting is the unusually low number of visible police cars. Indeed it is possible to drive completely through the state (all 800+ miles) and never see a policeman. In fact, Montana does not have a state police force, but rather a highway patrol. Ten years ago I was a good friend of one of the state's few highway patrol officers. I asked him how many officers were on duty at any time. He responded that at maximum there are 108 officers and at minimum 42 officers on duty at any time. Remember, Montana is larger in square miles than Germany. County and city law enforcement numbers are also low. In Ravalli County (seventh largest in population) there are at times only three sheriff's deputies on duty. Montana Highway Patrol officers are trained to serve and protect the public and little else.
    * Socio-Cultural Background

    About 10% of Montana's population is American Indian. The primary tribes (those with national homelands) are: Atsina (Gros Ventre), Chippewa, Blackfeet, Crow, Cree, Dakota, Assiniboine, Northern Cheyenne, Salish, and Kutenai. All of the states tribes have declared sovereignty from Montana and are fiercely independent (they acknowledge no Montana laws and few federal). Many non-Indians prefer to live on Indian land (12% of Montana) because of this almost total lack of restrictive rules, taxes, regulation,etc. Montana also has a very large French and Metis (French-Indian) population. Most of the French population are the descendents of mountain men and fur traders from the early 19th Century. They also tend to be independent in behavior. Probably Montana's single largest ethnic group is the Irish. They first came to the state to pan for gold and later to work in the copper mines of Butte. Little needs to be said about the frontier Irish and an independent nature. All three primary ethnic groups are enculturated to individualism and liberty ... all are free spirits.
    * Isolation

    About thirty years ago there was a popular book (in Montana at least) entitled Montana: A Two Lane Highway in a Four Lane World." Many thought the book amusing in the way that it portrayed the so-called backward and country ways/manners of Montana and Montanans. What was most illuminating about the book were the ways Montanans did most things differently than the rest of America (more about that later): no speed limits or anti-prostitution law enforcement, little liquor or gambling control, active gun culture, no sales tax, no pornography regulation, no "open container" laws or anti-nudity ordinances (seldom enforced), etc. The book made the case that because of Montana's isolation, the frontier values of 1889 and before had become part and parcel of Montana's political and cultural climate. In other words, the raw individualism and spirit of liberty of the men and women that settled and tamed Montana (somewhat) are still a living entity in the Montana of 1972 (and today).

    Montana's isolation has caused the state to be more self-sufficient than most. The state has its own private television network (The Montana Television Network-MTN), canning factories (Redlodge Brands, etc.), railroads (Montana Rail Link, + Butte, Anaconda and Pacific, etc.), truck farming regions, independent telephone companies (about 50), refineries and steel factories, etc. The state is set up to survive with or without the rest of America.
    * Other Freedom Indicators

    There are numerous other freedom indicators. One should remember that libertarian philosophy is not always an exact match with freedom as experienced by an individual. One such freedom is Montana's constitutional mandate that the state owns all water within the borders of Montana (up to the high water mark). This constitutional law is unique. In effect it allows anyone to hunt, fish, camp, target practice, live, hike, explode fire-crackers, etc. on any river, stream, creek, or brook in the state below the high water mark. Anyone that has tried to fish, hunt, etc. in say Colorado knows the value of such a law.

    Montana's 1972 Constitution allows counties and local government to be creative. Both counties and cities may be easily altered or abolished. About twenty years ago, all the towns and cities in Silver Bowl County (Butte) eradicated (unincorporated) themselves. All city governments, police forces, fire departments, etc. were abolished in the county. A new Silver Bowl County government was established that saves the taxpayers millions of dollars each year. Montana makes it very difficult for rural areas to be annexed by incorporated cities/towns, for a majority of the citizens must agree to be annexed . The state makes incorporating (cities and towns) very unrewarding. Once incorporated you do not get any money from the state or county ... a town is on its own. As recently as 1992, the fourth largest urban community in the state (Billings Heights) was unincorporated. Anyone that has ever driven through either rural or urban Montana can sense the almost total lack of zoning ordinances. People build what they want, where they want, on their own property.

    Members of the Free State Project should notice how the state treats it 57 Hutterite communities. Hutterites are a communal ethnic group that has frozen its social and religious culture in the rural 16th Century German-Tyrolean culture of its origin. Hutterites are a pure communist society that has a unique religion and speaks in an archaic German dialect. The culture refuses to acknowledge the state or to vote or serve in the military in any capacity. Traditionally they have refused to send any of their children to public schools. Each Hutterite community buys large land tracks and expands every 20-25 years (they have a very high birth rate). Although their social culture is frozen in time, their technical culture demands the most modern equipment available. Many consider them the most efficient farmers in the world. Because of their unusual culture and life-style, most states and provinces have legislated against them. They have been "outlawed" in North Dakota, and severe restrictions have been placed on them in South Dakota, Alberta, and elsewhere. Only Montana has made a successful accommodation with them ("The Hutterite Act" of 1956). Under the compromise, Hutterites may buy all the land they want, live communally, and live their own culture without any interference from Montana. Their only compromise was in education. All Hutterite children (from age 7-14) must attend Montana public schools. However, all schools may be at the principle church building (in a colony), and all the children (100%) may be Hutterite. In addition, the school board was allowed be all Hutterite and a third of the instruction could be whatever the Hutterite desire. The agreement allowed the colonies to select the teacher (who is not permitted to reside in the colony). The Hutterite are also exempted from serving in the Militia of Montana. Because of this agreement, almost all new colonies started since 1960 are in Montana. Because of their high birth rate, archaic Tyrolean-German has become the third most common language used by Montanans (Crow is second) under eighteen years of age.

    For many years a few large corporations owned most of the private land in the state. Because of this the state has placed severe restrictions on giant corporations and has designed legislation that helps small businesses. An example of this would be the gambling laws. To keep large Las Vegas type corporations away from the state, Montana puts a limit of 25 gambling machines per private company (usually Keno or poker machines). Anyone that has a beer, wine, or hard liquor permit may establish a casino. Anyone with $250.00 can get a beer permit (no limits). A gambling permit also costs $250.00. The cost of the permit is used to pay private machine inspectors that check every thirty days to make sure the machines are paying off at the listed rate (80%). Because service stations like Conoco are individually owned, they (Conoco) have become the largest casino name in the state. At least half of all gasoline stations are casinos. It should be noted that an individual might own an unlimited amount of (limited to 25 machines per location) casinos.

    The Constitution of Montana is stronger than the interpreted U.S. Constitution in regards to privacy rights. A man's home is his castle. The State Supreme Court has ruled (on several occasions) that a person's vehicle is considered one's home. Thus, probable cause or a search warrant must be used to search an automobile. A few years ago the Missoula city police thought that a new "cash cow" would be to check for drunk drivers exiting from "tail-gate parties" at University of Montana football games. This lasted for only one weekend before a state judge ruled that such police actions were in violation of the Montana Constitution. The state has no "open container" laws. Indeed, many Montanans build elaborate bars on the dash area of their vehicles.

    Restrictions on freedom are not limited to government. Social-cultural limitations on lived freedom are often as severe as anything that government might impose. On paper, Utah has a high level of liberty; however, in practice, Utah is very restrictive on personal freedom. An example would be the recent news story about a suburban Utah lady who worked in her garden every day clad only in a very revealing Bikini. Local socio-cultural traditions forced the local city government to prohibit her from dressing in a Bikini.

    This would never happen in Montana. Many former out-of-state people (now long-time residence of Montana) mention this freedom from conservative values that exists in Montana. Try wearing your Colt .45's when entering a saloon in Colorado (or Kansas, etc.). This is common in Montana; for, the spirit of the old West (closely related to the spirit of 1776) still lives in the "Big Sky." Try taking your children with you to a casino in Nevada. In Montana, not only are children welcomed in casinos, they can bring you your whiskey ditch to drink. Before July 1, 1993 it was legal for a ten year old to enter a hard liquor bar/casino and order and smoke a pack of cigarettes. The law was only changed because of Federal pressure (Montana was the 50th state to establish an age limit on the purchase of tobacco products). Montana law also makes it illegal for police to arrest a publicly intoxicated person unless that person's health is in immediate danger or the person is breaking the law. A famous business in Missoula (Montana's second largest city) is called "The Joint Effort." Last year the FBI and DEA tried to get the city of Missoula to deny the business a business license and close it down. The city told the Feds to back off and stop interfering with private businesses and with regulations that are solely the concern of state or local governments (thus far, the feds have done what they were told).

    The state constitution is very strong in free speech/press rights. I have read several times that Montana is one of only four states (I don't know the other three) that has total freedom of speech and press. The state also prohibits local governments from interfering with freedom of speech and press. Out-of-staters that enter an adult bookstore are always shocked. Any and all sexual acts imaginable with man or beast are for purchase. A decade ago I was the head administrator for a school in northern Idaho (a much different cultural realm than Montana). The high school 4-H club had a conference to attend in southeastern Idaho. It was easiest to get to the conference by driving through western Montana. At Missoula, Montana the bus broke down and all the students had to spend a night in a local motel that just happened to be across the street from a typical Montana Adult bookstore and recreation center. Some of the students managed to sneak away from the chaperons and get into the adult center. They are still talking about this in that small community in northern Idaho. It seems, that some students saw a whole new world that was and is unimaginable in Idaho (or most of America). There were two special school board meetings called to discus the "sin" Idaho teenagers had been exposed to. However, I did notice, as time moved on, that a higher than average number of our students decided to attend colleges in Montana.

    Montana is the place of choice for anti-socials to retreat. The Unabomber, the Freemen, Peter Fonda, etc. all selected the state to become hidden. Because of Montana's reputation and laws the feds usually treat Montana and Montanans with knit gloves (compared to other states). In 1996 a group of "Freemen" were surrounded in a remote area of eastern Montana. The feds, apparently either fearful of Montana's laws (it is illegal under the state constitution for any armed band of people to enter the state without the permission of the legislature or governor) or people, the FBI requested that the Montana Highway Patrol and the Governor be in charge of surrounding and arresting the Freeman. Governor Raicott agreed, but later billed the FBI 4.8 million dollars. During the siege (that went on for weeks) a federal agent was never seen on TV. Of course, the Montana Highway Patrol arrested all 24 people without a shot being fired. Compare this with Waco and the way the FBI treated Texans, Texas law, and Texas law enforcement officials. The "Gestapo" behaves in Montana.

    In summary, experienced or real freedom is higher in Montana than any other state. Not only is the heavy hand of government noticed less in Montana, the heavy hand of conservative social morality is at a lower level than any other state. One can dump a broken down 1958 Studebaker in the front yard and sit on it everyday in one's underwear drinking beer, wearing a holstered .45 auto, and make obscene gestures at traffic passing by in the largest city in Montana and not get arrested (unless, of course, one throws beer bottles or shoots at the passing vehicles). If freedom is the primary objective of the Free State Project, then Montana is the best place to locate. It is the place Thomas Jefferson would live in if he were alive.
    Last edited by Benaiah; 02-27-2008 at 01:38 PM.

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benaiah View Post
    Since you put NH house in bold, you should put Montana's senate in bold.



    I vote Montana.
    I did that cause it's the lowest number.

    I just want to clarify something, I didn't make this list to pick just one state. This is more so of a guide of states we can easily take over. I don't know about you guys, but I want all of them, or close to all.

    There is a strategy I have that I'm waiting to announce until I have my site up (which will be in about 5 days). But to summarize it, no one state will suffice.

    Rather we need a cooperation with multiple states, and even foreign nations.
    For good times, IM me.

  10. #9

    Default

    bump. read that link a previous poster put up... Montana sounds too good to be true.
    http://www.freestateproject.org/arch...s/montana1.php

  11. #10
    1836
    Member

    Default

    You don't seem to understand, New Hampshire's house seats are by town.

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1836 View Post
    You don't seem to understand, New Hampshire's house seats are by town.
    How don't I understand?? What difference is there then?
    For good times, IM me.

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benaiah View Post
    bump. read that link a previous poster put up... Montana sounds too good to be true.
    http://www.freestateproject.org/arch...s/montana1.php
    It sounds good, I would fund anyone who runs for legislation there that is against the Union.
    For good times, IM me.

  14. #13

    Default

    I already decided recently that if my girl and I stay in the states, we are moving to Montana when we graduate.

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benaiah View Post
    I already decided recently that if my girl and I stay in the states, we are moving to Montana when we graduate.
    Run for senate and I'll fund you. Have your girl run too. And bring some friends/family.
    For good times, IM me.

  16. #15

    Default

    Montana's looking better and better the more I read about it. I even have family on my mom's side that lives up there. Hmmm...

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nate K View Post
    And when I say take over I mean have complete control of the legislative process in that state.

    So what states are these??

    Alaska
    Delaware
    Idaho
    Kansas
    Maine
    Mississippi
    Montana
    New Hampshire
    North Dakota
    Rhode Island
    South Dakota
    Vermont
    West Virginia
    Wyoming


    Why these states you may ask?? Simple, it's all based on Representatives and Senators ratio to the population. Example: In a state with 5 million, if that state has 100 state representatives, it has a representative to population ratio of 50,000.

    What's our goal? Ultimately to get the lowest ratio possible. Why do that? You have the best chance of persuading a smaller community with limited funds. The smaller the ratio, the less funds you would need, the less effort, the less of a "politician" you need to be, etc.

    Here are the ratios of the states I mentioned:

    Alaska: House: 16,700 Senate: 33,500
    Delaware: House: 20,800 Senate: 40,600
    Idaho: House: 21,400 Senate: 42,800
    Kansas: House: 22,400 Senate: 70,000
    Maine: House: 8,600 Senate: 37,100
    Mississippi: House: 23,700 Senate: 55,800
    Montana: House: 9,400 Senate: 18,800
    New Hampshire: House: 3,200 Senate: 54,100
    North Dakota: House: 6,700 Senate: 13,500
    Rhode Island: House: 13,300 Senate: 26,300
    South Dakota: House: 11,200 Senate: 22,300
    Vermont: House: 4,100 Senate: 20,800
    West Virginia: House: 18,000 Senate: 53,000
    Wyoming: House: 8,500 Senate: 17,100


    It's important to note the average ratio of all the states for the House is around 75,000. The Senate around 150,000. That's what makes these states stand out.


    I believe most of these states you have to be a resident of the state for around 3-4 years and a resident of the district for a year to be eligible to run. So that means get to it!
    I like your thinking Nate.

    Did you do an analysis on Washington State by any chance? The west side is pretty densely populated but the east side is sparsely populated. I'm just curious to see how my state compares to the one listed. I'm curious about Oregon also if you have data on it. It would be great to have a big block of neighboring states (Wash, Oregon, Montana, Idaho. N and S Dakota, Wyoming). That's a big enough chunk to become a country if all else fails .

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MusoSpuso View Post
    Montana's looking better and better the more I read about it. I even have family on my mom's side that lives up there. Hmmm...
    I live near the Montana border and have been through there many, many times. It's beautiful country. I still remember my first road trip through Montana. There were areas I drove through that all I could think was "Ohhhhhhhh......this is what people mean when they say "this is God's country". It was a religious experience from a non-religious person!

    Montana rocks if you don't appreciate the city life. If you appreciate the city life, then Montana sucks. It's an outdoor paradise.

  19. #18

  20. #19

    Default

    Keep in mind, Montana gave our highest percentage in the 2008 Republican nomination with 24.57% of the vote.

  21. #20

  22. #21

    Default

    Montana. Just have to decide where in the state.

    My only hesitation is the fact that it'll be damn hard for me to find work there, but I'll see what I can do.
    Those who want liberty must organize as effectively as those who want tyranny. -- Iyad el Baghdadi

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PatriotOne View Post
    I like your thinking Nate.

    Did you do an analysis on Washington State by any chance? The west side is pretty densely populated but the east side is sparsely populated. I'm just curious to see how my state compares to the one listed. I'm curious about Oregon also if you have data on it. It would be great to have a big block of neighboring states (Wash, Oregon, Montana, Idaho. N and S Dakota, Wyoming). That's a big enough chunk to become a country if all else fails .
    Absolutely, did the data on every state.

    Washington: House: 65,300 Senate: 130,600
    Oregon: House: 61,600 Senate: 123,300


    And I'm glad you like my thinking If you like this, it's only a tip of the iceberg of some other plans and strategies I have. I'll be documenting them in blog form very soon, site should be up Monday.
    For good times, IM me.

  24. #23

    Default

    With all the Montana talk, let's not forget about Alaska. Many of the same advantages as Montana, but with a significant physical disconnect from the mainland, free money for living there thanks to natural resources, and snow. Being a Texan I can always be motivated by the possibilities of snow.
    Quote Originally Posted by me3 View Post
    Sounds like you guys are guilty of conspiracy to commit Liberty.

  25. #24

    Default

    Update- I put in parenthesis on the first post, the number of representatives and senators in each state.

    I will have full information on each states' population, House and senate number and ratio once my site is launched.
    For good times, IM me.

  26. #25

    Default

    Everyone who is interested in this thread should check out..

    http://www.freestateproject.org/

    Go to "101 Reasons". I'm sold on New Hampshire.

    I was skeptical at first but i guarantee you'll change your mind.
    For good times, IM me.

  27. #26

    Default

    Takeover the sheeple and you need no state.

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mavtek View Post
    Takeover the sheeple and you need no state.
    Not true. Our Constitutional Republic was designed so we could find the state that suits us best. Even if we were following the Constitution, I'd still move.
    Last edited by Richie; 02-27-2008 at 04:25 PM.

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nate K View Post
    Absolutely, did the data on every state.

    Washington: House: 65,300 Senate: 130,600
    Oregon: House: 61,600 Senate: 123,300


    And I'm glad you like my thinking If you like this, it's only a tip of the iceberg of some other plans and strategies I have. I'll be documenting them in blog form very soon, site should be up Monday.
    Those ratio's are higher than I assumed. We are all going to have to breed like rabbits to get a foot hold in WA/OR. I proclaim abortions and birth control illegal in the RP movement

  30. #29

    Default

    Looking at these numbers, the first thing I thought was, "How does NH support offices, staff, and travel for 400 house members?"
    " Anyone can become angry. That is easy. But to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose and in the right way - that is not easy." --Aristotle

  31. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by american.swan View Post
    Looking at these numbers, the first thing I thought was, "How does NH support offices, staff, and travel for 400 house members?"
    They get $200 biannually.

    $100 salary = real people in politics.
    For good times, IM me.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast





Similar Threads

  1. Easily Paul's best debate
    By CTRattlesnake in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 02-23-2012, 07:30 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-10-2011, 01:40 PM
  3. Are We Letting Fox News Off Too Easily?
    By libertygrl in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 02-25-2011, 04:40 AM
  4. SIgn Of The Easily Fooled.
    By Objectivist in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-16-2009, 04:28 AM
  5. Whats Next? Something that can't be insulted as easily...
    By JVParkour in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 04-20-2009, 01:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •