I didn't watch the Oregon governor's race closely, but it seems common for third party candidates to poll relatively high a few months before the election then have their support dwindle as the date approaches. I'm used to seeing this in races where the candidate never had any numbers as high as 35% so I've always attributed it to people jumping ship to vote for the major party candidate that they consider the lesser of two evils once it's increasingly clear that the third party candidate isn't going to win. 35% could have been enough to win a three-way race though, so it's discouraging that so many people fell for the propaganda even after all we've been through the past few years.
You make a good point with #2, the physical and mental fragility of modern Americans throws a wrench into any predictions. The military is finding it hard to find enough people who pass the physical exam these days. However, the rich and powerful might think they can get around this by bringing in mercenaries from parts of the world that don't have as much of the modern, climate-controlled, safety-focused lifestyle.
As far as #3 goes, I agree that the divisions in modern America are very different than they were in the 1860s, and any modern civil war will be very different from the previous one. What concerns me is that during the Civil War, the regions where loyalties were divided often suffered most of all, even if they weren't in the path of the major armies. Families were divided, and warbands used the lawlessness of the war as an excuse to ravage the land. Cities/regions with different loyalties than the surrounding areas had a rough time of it too, an example being Knoxville, TN which was a stronghold for unionists in a confederate state.
Other nations also may have interest in provoking civil war here in America and destroying the heart of the American empire. I already wonder how much China is adding fuel to the fire through influence of social media. If civil war does break out, the complex map of political loyalties could make the outcome worse than if the majority of regions were clearly on one side or the other.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: breaking the binary
Date: 2022-11-10 11:53 pm (UTC)You make a good point with #2, the physical and mental fragility of modern Americans throws a wrench into any predictions. The military is finding it hard to find enough people who pass the physical exam these days. However, the rich and powerful might think they can get around this by bringing in mercenaries from parts of the world that don't have as much of the modern, climate-controlled, safety-focused lifestyle.
As far as #3 goes, I agree that the divisions in modern America are very different than they were in the 1860s, and any modern civil war will be very different from the previous one. What concerns me is that during the Civil War, the regions where loyalties were divided often suffered most of all, even if they weren't in the path of the major armies. Families were divided, and warbands used the lawlessness of the war as an excuse to ravage the land. Cities/regions with different loyalties than the surrounding areas had a rough time of it too, an example being Knoxville, TN which was a stronghold for unionists in a confederate state.
Other nations also may have interest in provoking civil war here in America and destroying the heart of the American empire. I already wonder how much China is adding fuel to the fire through influence of social media. If civil war does break out, the complex map of political loyalties could make the outcome worse than if the majority of regions were clearly on one side or the other.