The split between conservative rural areas and progressive-socialist cities is on course to become not merely cultural, but physical. Five very, red republican-dominated counties in the deep-blue Peoples’ Republic of Portland, -er, “State of Oregon” will vote this year.
Their goal? To form “Greater Idaho” seeking their fortunes under the laws and regulations of the far more politically aligned Boise government as opposed to the at best negligent, at worst hostile leftists in Portland.
On their website, the movement explains to Oregonians,
“Is your residence included in the area proposed to join Idaho? If not, these border relocations might allow you a much shorter move. You’d be a part of a red state like Idaho, and still be within driving distance of friends and family. These counties are suited to Idaho’s values, as proven by their voting patterns. State borders should match this reality. The value of having the U.S. divided into states is to allow local governance to match the kind of government desired by the people in an area.”
Understanding the Red vs. Blue, Rural vs. City Divide
For conservatives and libertarians long forsaken by their Portlandia overlords, the prospect must be very tempting. As we are all soon to discover, living under a government that upholds the values of BLM and Antifa over American values is already difficult, and becoming intolerable.
The Washington Times reports,
“Move Oregon’s Border, also known as Greater Idaho, confirmed Tuesday that the initiative to move swaths of largely rural eastern and southern Oregon into Idaho qualified for the May 18 special election ballot in five counties: Baker, Grant, Lake, Malheur and Sherman.”
Five Oregon counties to vote on leaving state, escaping to 'Greater Idaho'https://t.co/W2eY3mm73Z pic.twitter.com/B9HumRKgJN
— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) February 24, 2021
Mike McCarter, president of Move Oregon’s Border, wrote in a statement.
“Oregon is a powder keg because counties that belong in a red-state like Idaho are ruled by Portlanders,” he continued “This state protects Antifa arsonists, not normal Oregonians, it prioritizes one race above another for vaccines and program money and in the school curriculum, and it prioritizes Willamette Valley above rural Oregon,”
“Divisions in Oregon are getting dangerous, so we see the relocation of the border as a way to keep the peace. It’s not divisive,” Mr. McCarter said. “Oregon and Idaho are already divided by a state line. The problem is that the location of the state line was decided 161 years ago and is now outdated. Its current location doesn’t match the cultural divide in Oregon.”
Oregon’s Senate Democratic Leader Responds
Oregon Senate President and Democrat Peter Courtney told local ABC affiliate KATU,
“It makes me sad, it does concern me. Because I care about or love all of Oregon. When a section of Oregon, says the want to leave or secede from our state that’s something that really bothers me.” Courtney suggested a summit with legislators from the region “I am very concerned about this group…I do think I’d want to deal with the state legislators from that part of the state and say, Do we need to have a major summit? Or what needs to be done here to really listen to what these individuals are talking about?” But the damage may already be done, it seemed that Sen. Courtney only sees a small fraction of the fundamental divide between rural Oregon and his city constituency.
“As I understand it this group is very upset about the decriminalization of certain drug crimes that just passed from urban areas, it’s the urban vote that made it happen. I sometimes think that you can talk and then you can act. I do think that those of us in the valley, in the urban area need to constantly remind ourselves and think ‘rural Oregon’ I totally feel that and I mean that.”
Asked if the legislature would approve or even consider such a move Senator Courtney dismissed it. But he did seem to understand that this problem cannot be ignored, especially if it is fueled by a growing mutual hatred of Red vs. Blue, Patriot vs. Progressive, Republican vs. Democrat as opposed to mere policy disagreements.
“I wouldn’t, emotionally no, I hope we’d never look at that. Would it ever happen? Would there ever be a secession movement? I hope not. I mean, I find it very unbelievable.
“But you know, if this is not a matter of disagreements separating us, it’s a matter of hatred and real dislike, that really worries me. And that’s what I’m worried about here.”
“What I’m really concerned about is how deep this is. Is this just we disagree? Or just we really don’t like you. This is a matter of hatred, because we live in such divisive, mean spirited times. To get through that is very hard.”
“So, I don’t think we would, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t act like it wouldn’t happen. Because if we act like it, then maybe we’ll sit down and really think hard about this rural-urban divide.”
