NH is too cold and too close to the liberal baston called Massachusetts.
You might be surprised by the weather of New Hampshire. Did you know that New Hampshire is warmer than much of CT, IN, IL, MA, NE, OH and PA? https://nhfreedom.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/putting-new-hampshires-weather-into-perspective/
As for NH being near Boston, that's mostly a plus, the way I see. People that don't like taxes/liberalism move from MA to NH. People that don't like taxes shop in NH. People that like freedom shop in NH. People that like mountains and rivers vacation in NH. NH people that like urban culture visit Boston. NH people that want to make 6 figures work in Boston.
Texas would'd been better because there's so much land and it's warmer so one can grow stuffs.
There is lots of land in NH (almost all of NH is just land with trees on it). You can grow stuff in NH. Unlike western TX, there is plenty of water in NH. Crops don't grow outside all year in NH but they grow outside into November.
Cities are where liberties come to die.
True. TX has a lot of large urban areas that are either very liberal or very police state-like. They have insane traffic, crime and pollution problems.
So pick Texas and concentrate activism in city centers.
I am not sure you have any idea what the FSP is about. The idea is to move to a low population state so that 20,000 liberty activists could make an impact. Obviously, Texas has just about the most people of any state in the nation. TX was never considered for the FSP, nor would it ever be. The very large population means that the idea of the FSP is completely incompatible with Texas.
Maybe if the idea was to recruit 250,000 pro-liberty activists? Of course, even recruiting 20,000 pro-liberty activists has proven very hard. Maybe it would take 150 years to recruit 250,000 pro-liberty activists to move to TX?
Personally, I lived in Texas. I did not like it there. Having lived both places, I consider the TX weather MUCH worse than NH weather.