I went back to get a little background. I came across David Daley's book, where he outlines how Democrats were asleep at the switch while Republican operatives openly announced what they were going to do and then went ahead and did it - seized upon the 2010 census as an opportunity to perform massive redistricting in key states across the country.
The result was a legislature that doesn't accurately represent the people of the state, because the election was 'tilted' (I hesitate to say 'rigged' - I reserve that term for more direct fraud) by extreme redistricting. The more a legislature fails to represent the population of a state, the more I would call the government 'unstable.' I theorized that there were a lot of people in North Carolina who felt unfairly characterized by what the legislature was doing, as if the state was a monolithic population of reactionaries in the eyes of the rest of the country, resulting in boycotts and ridicule.
To me, the essence of HB2, was how the state legislature directly overrode municipalities across the state. I looked into how HB2 was suspiciously similar to similar measures in other states, right down to the wording. This further convinced me that the bill and the legislature that passed it did not fairly represent the people of North Carolina, and they were not going to sit idly by while all this went on. Call it 'anti democratic' if you will, but the point is, if government drifts (or is pushed) too far away from what the citizens (voters) really want, there is likely to be big trouble and soon.
Now I think we are about to see what happens now that, in my opinion, the entire country has become more 'unstable,' if you will, after the 2016 election. I am waiting to see how the 157 million people, who did not vote for Donald Trump are going to react to what he does. Even some of the 63 million who did vote for him may not end up being too pleased.