this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
339 points (95.9% liked)

politics

18828 readers
6042 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump continued his push on Saturday to win the Republican presidential nomination with a pair of caucus rallies in Iowa, beginning at the DMACC Conference Center in Newton and then culminating in Clinton. His speeches come on the third anniversary of Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and a little more than a week before the Republican Iowa caucus commences on Jan. 15.

As for commemorating the solemn anniversary of Jan. 6, Trump lauded the insurrectionists, while labeling some immigrants as “terrorists” and prisoners and gang members. “And terrorists are coming in also. What they’re doing to our country is not — it’s it’s, when you talk about insurrection, what they’re doing? That’s the real deal. That the real deal — not patriotically and peacefully, peacefully and patriotically” he said, contrasting those who rioted as “peaceful” and “patriotic” against immigrants, who the four-time indicted former president continually paints as criminals.

“I’m so attracted to seeing it,” Trump said. “So many mistakes were made. See, there was something I think could have been negotiated to be honest with you. … I was reading something and I said, ‘This is something that could have been negotiated … that was a that was a tough one for our country… If you negotiated it, you probably wouldn’t even know who Abraham Lincoln was … but that would have been OK.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 181 points 8 months ago (2 children)

The three presidents before Lincoln all tried negotiating. They ended up capitulating to the south. They're considered three of the worst presidents in US history. After Trump

[–] gravitas_deficiency 61 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But Andrew Johnson, who was president after Lincoln, is absolutely up there in terms of terribleness, seeing as he kneecapped any real punitive action on the vast majority of major confed leaders and the south in general, leading directly to Jim Crow, as well as making the “southern strategy” a viable tactic, and ultimately leading to the mutation of the GOP into what it is today - including Trump.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Boothe is getting exactly what he wanted albeit almost 160 years later.
He assassinated Lincoln in an effort to destabilize the union and liberate the south. He wasn't aware that the war was essentially over at that point and that only a few Confederate militias remained.
Well, putting Johnson in office ended reconstruction and put into motion everything listed in the above comment.
Now we're in real danger of losing our democracy and we've got a neo-confederate guerilla force that's already trashed the Capitol once and is ready to do it again in 11 months.
And none of this would be happening without Boothe.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And none of this would be happening without Boothe.

It's soo interesting that Kennedy's assassination (which also elevated a VP from the south named Johnson) wasn't ever talked about like it was more of the confederacy being ungovernable over desegregation and civil rights

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Speaking of assassinations, MLK had been leading the campaign for civil rights since 1955, but didn't get assassinated until 1968. What else happened related to him in 1968? Well, he had just started pivoting towards the Poor People's Campaign.

Maybe you're right that Kennedy was assassinated because of his support for civil rights (even though MLK was tolerated for another half-decade), but considering all the other leftist domestic policies he was trying to push through in addition to the civil rights stuff, it makes me wonder.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago

There's a lesson to be learned here about capitulating to evil.

Those abolitionists and their purity tests, never thinking about what abolition will do to the economy.