Why did Little River County, AR swung so hard to the Republicans in 2008?

[R.P. McM]

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

WWC voters in less racist parts of the country did the predicable thing — swung hard against the incumbent party. But in more racist parts of the country — the South, Appalachia — they preferred Kerry to Obama for reasons of "economic anxiety." In the midst of the worst downturn since the Depression, mind you. Yeah, there's just no denying it — they're racist white trash . It's a cancer that Lincoln and Grant and Sherman should've eradicated, but now we're stuck with it, sadly.

[R.P. McM]

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

Look at the raw vote change, its really not much. Around 800-900 voters had to change their mind to cause such a swing

Happened in numerous, contiguous counties in Appalachia and the South. But nowhere else, essentially. Yeah, we can all decipher the motivation — "economic anxiety." Hahahaha! 

[R.P. McM]

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

Look at the raw vote change, its really not much. Around 800-900 voters had to change their mind to cause such a swing

Happened in numerous, contiguous counties in Appalachia and the South. But nowhere else, essentially. Yeah, we can all decipher the motivation — "economic anxiety." Hahahaha! 

Not what I was saying, what I was saying it isnt hard for huge swings to happen in counties like this lol

LOL —  given the political environment, it only really happened in the South and Appalachia, because those folks are hardcore racists. Racism: LOL!

[R.P. McM]

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

Look at the raw vote change, its really not much. Around 800-900 voters had to change their mind to cause such a swing

Happened in numerous, contiguous counties in Appalachia and the South. But nowhere else, essentially. Yeah, we can all decipher the motivation — "economic anxiety." Hahahaha!  

Not what I was saying, what I was saying it isnt hard for huge swings to happen in counties like this lol

LOL —  given the political environment, it only really happened in the South and Appalachia, because those folks are hardcore racists. Racism: LOL!

Im not disputing that lmao, im just saying why it was so easy for a huge shift to happen

I honestly have no idea what you're saying. That said counties are bigly racist, but sparsely populated? In many cases, I suppose you're right, but we are talking about most of AR, OK, TN, LA, etc.

[R.P. McM]

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

WWC voters in less racist parts of the country did the predicable thing — swung hard against the incumbent party. But in more racist parts of the country — the South, Appalachia — they preferred Kerry to Obama for reasons of "economic anxiety." In the midst of the worst downturn since the Depression, mind you. Yeah, there's just no denying it — they're racist white trash . It's a cancer that Lincoln and Grant and Sherman should've eradicated, but now we're stuck with it, sadly.

I'm so glad the forum is still JUST classy enough that we don't have users saying things like "Black trash" about poor areas of Detroit or "Latino trash" about poor Hispanic communities in Texas.

Stay classy!

What are you going to do, elect me president? Suck it up, snowflake.

[R.P. McM]

Racism + more yellow dogs dying off + Hillary supporters angry that she lost the primary would be my guess.

Mostly this

Now, I don’t think racism is a such big factor, it’s more a cultural thing, Kerry was fairly liberal but he was also a veteran

Ah yes, conservative Southern whites have deep respect for soldiers, veterans, and decorated war heroes, including John Kerry /s.

[R.P. McM]

Huh. I didn't even realize there was such a large bloc of Kerry-McCain voters. I thought that the financial meltdown would have prevented any WWC erosion in 2008, but I guess I was wrong.

WWC voters in less racist parts of the country did the predicable thing — swung hard against the incumbent party. But in more racist parts of the country — the South, Appalachia — they preferred Kerry to Obama for reasons of "economic anxiety." In the midst of the worst downturn since the Depression, mind you. Yeah, there's just no denying it — they're racist white trash . It's a cancer that Lincoln and Grant and Sherman should've eradicated, but now we're stuck with it, sadly.

I'm so glad the forum is still JUST classy enough that we don't have users saying things like "Black trash" about poor areas of Detroit or "Latino trash" about poor Hispanic communities in Texas.

Stay classy!

What are you going to do, elect me president? Suck it up, snowflake.

Just don't claim to be overly tolerant, which I'm sure you do.

I have never claimed to be tolerant of racists, authoritarians, morons, or sexual predators. Rhetorically, I drop the hammer. And should we ever find ourselves in such a situation in which peaceful coexistence becomes impossible, yes, I'll pull the trigger . Am I an extremist? No, no more so than the 101st Airborne's conduct toward the Waffen-SS was "extreme."

[R.P. McM]

Racism + more yellow dogs dying off + Hillary supporters angry that she lost the primary would be my guess.

Mostly this

Now, I don’t think racism is a such big factor, it’s more a cultural thing, Kerry was fairly liberal but he was also a veteran

Ah yes, conservative Southern whites have deep respect for soldiers, veterans, and decorated war heroes, including John Kerry /s.

Yeah, it's why dems tend to nominate veterans in tough southern/appalachian districts (Conor Lamb, Amy McBath, Dan McCready, Spanberger, Ojeda)

Maybe it helps, but Republicans have no qualms about smearing veterans, including Kerry, McCain, and Spanberger, so who knows. Amoral, authoritarian animals, FTW!!!

[R.P. McM]

I'm sure they had very logical reasons for shifting heavily towards the Republican Party in the midst of a financial crisis and an environment where Obama was winning by 7 points in the national popular vote. It couldn't POSSIBLY be racism playing a factor, nope, I'm sure they would have voted for Alan Keyes against a white Democrat because of gay marriage or whatever.

Why do people feel a need to pick one reason constantly and lump everyone together?

Because 90% of your party supports Trump, and you aren't the One True Scotsman, hombre.

Sure, I bet there were some racist Democrats who refused to support a Black nominee ... I'm also sure a non-insignificant number of Yellow Dogs continued to die since 2004 ... I'm also sure some conservative-leaning independents who voted for Kerry because their grandpappy was a Democrat saw Obama's comments about "clinging to guns" as pretty damn insulting and said they'd never vote for another Democrat again

What about Mitt Romney's comments about guns? Or Donald Trump's? This BS is just getting too ludicrous to even entertain. Yes, a sizable subset of the Republican base is racist, including an immense number of white Southerners. Sorry, deal with it.

[R.P. McM]

Racism + more yellow dogs dying off + Hillary supporters angry that she lost the primary would be my guess.

Mostly this

Now, I don’t think racism is a such big factor, it’s more a cultural thing, Kerry was fairly liberal but he was also a veteran

Ah yes, conservative Southern whites have deep respect for soldiers, veterans, and decorated war heroes, including John Kerry /s.

Yeah, it's why dems tend to nominate veterans in tough southern/appalachian districts (Conor Lamb, Amy McBath, Dan McCready, Spanberger, Ojeda)

Maybe it helps, but Republicans have no qualms about smearing veterans, including Kerry, McCain, and Spanberger, so who knows. Amoral, authoritarian animals, FTW!  

Trump wasn’t even the first to smear McCain in that regard. Bush II had someone speaking at his South Carolina rallies who said, “McCain grew tired of the veterens.”

Oh, yes, I remember. It was disgusting, but quite frankly, many of these folks are anti-American and quite disgusting. They booed a gay soldier serving in a combat zone! Yeah, they're trash, and I'm done trying to make nice.
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5mmFPyDK_8

[R.P. McM]

I'm sure they had very logical reasons for shifting heavily towards the Republican Party in the midst of a financial crisis and an environment where Obama was winning by 7 points in the national popular vote. It couldn't POSSIBLY be racism playing a factor, nope, I'm sure they would have voted for Alan Keyes against a white Democrat because of gay marriage or whatever.

Why do people feel a need to pick one reason constantly and lump everyone together?

Because 90% of your party supports Trump, and you aren't the One True Scotsman, hombre.

Sure, I bet there were some racist Democrats who refused to support a Black nominee ... I'm also sure a non-insignificant number of Yellow Dogs continued to die since 2004 ... I'm also sure some conservative-leaning independents who voted for Kerry because their grandpappy was a Democrat saw Obama's comments about "clinging to guns" as pretty damn insulting and said they'd never vote for another Democrat again

What about Mitt Romney's comments about guns? Or Donald Trump's? This BS is just getting too ludicrous to even entertain. Yes, a sizable subset of the Republican base is racist, including an immense number of white Southerners. Sorry, deal with it.

There are very *unbecoming* elements in a "sizable subset" of the Democratic base, rife with sexism, crime and what some incredibly insecure and angry people might call "trashy" attributes.  They just happen to be non-White

There we go. Why don't you tell us how you really feel?

Republicans are just supposed to sit back and shut up as you literally dehumanize their voters, but the point is good people don't judge entire groups of people by their anecdotal experiences and stereotype them all.

I judge people by their behavior. So when Republicans elect a racist sexual predator and then stand by him as he praises Nazis, cages children, and incites mob violence, yeah, I'm going to form some pretty harsh judgments. This is an inevitable consequence of voting for and continuing to support Trump. So you need to stop crying when I point out how terrible this vile creature is making y'all look, and maybe try to persuade some of your fellow partisans to rediscover a little decency and humanity.

I'm sure you'll turn into a decent enough poster when you age, but have some respect for the site, at least.  We don't need bratty little teenage partisans filling threads with heated projections about "THE OTHER PARTY."  This site isn't about that.  Take that BS to a forum dedicated to being a Democratic circle jerk; there are plenty.  There are several liberal, Democratic posters here who might even share your razor sharp views, but notice they carry themselves better ... we all go through a shltposting phase on this site, but yours is especially loud.  This site is not going to be a very effective platform to convince everyone that you are a better person - by being morally superior, educationally superior, more cosmopolitan or whatever other accolade you think is bestowed upon anyone who rejects the Republican Party - than anyone with differing views, so I would gain some nuance, newbie.

So you're saying you're ready to elect me president?! I thank you for your support, comrade! Hahahaha! Yeah, let's be honest, if I were sitting in the Oval Office as a member of your party, you'd have absolutely no problem with my rhetoric. Personally, I'd demand a little more of the president than a pseudonymous internet poster, but I'm not a Republican, obviously. Now, truth be told, I used to be quite a bit more measured. But you folks have so eagerly jettisoned your purported values in favor of authoritarianism and white supremacy, I find myself outraged and a bit fearful. If Trump can so easily persuade y'all to embrace an obvious violation of the Constitution under the pretense of a phony emergency, what else is he capable of making you do? If he can sh!+ on the graves of war heroes and side with Vladimir Putin over American intelligence agencies, what's the limit to the treachery and depravity? It's for these reasons that I have trouble speaking of the current political situation in detached, clinical tones. Increasingly, I view the GOP as a threat to democracy and the rule of law, and my rhetoric reflects that level of alarm.      

[R.P. McM]

Lol, okay.  You are talking to someone who voted for Hillary Clinton and quite regularly condemns Donald Trump, so ... not sure what you're babbling about, honestly.

See, the problem here is that I don't know you from Adam. But maybe you are the One True Scotsman. My mother's partner, a man I'm quite close with (fishing buddy), is in the same boat (). So I recognize that you folks exist, and I apologize for lumping you in with the deplorables. But you have to understand, this is a predictable consequence of associating yourself with an individual/group currently engaged in some rather odious behavior. Electing the nation's most prominent birther following the nation's first non-white president was a terrible move for a party often accused of harboring racial animus. For many if not most Democrats, the debate is now over, the question is settled. Consequently, you're going to have to contend with a widespread perception that the GOP is crawling with bigots. Naturally, you're going to find some of that suspicion cast upon yourself. But as generalizations go, one based on the behavior/beliefs of 9/10^ths of a voluntary group is hardly unfair. If there's anyone you should be upset with, it's your fellow partisans.    

[R.P. McM]

It's a cancer that Lincoln and Grant and Sherman should've eradicated, but now we're stuck with it, sadly.

Lincoln came from a family of poor white trash in the border states.

Nope. Lincoln came from a family of MA puritans — Yankees — who migrated westward. Try again.

[R.P. McM]

It's a cancer that Lincoln and Grant and Sherman should've eradicated, but now we're stuck with it, sadly.

Lincoln came from a family of poor white trash in the border states.

Nope. Lincoln came from a family of MA puritans — Yankees — who migrated westward. Try again.

His base did yes, but he did not.

He was born in Kentucky (The definition of a border state) and his family was struggling so they moved to Indiana and then to Illinois.

What part of that is incorrect?

I think there's a big difference between the values of the Lincoln family and the Calhoun family, for instance. Being poor doesn't make you 'white trash' — it's more a belligerent, anti-intellectual attitude. It's akin to poor white Southerners in the early-20th century vs. equally poor immigrant Jews. Obviously, one group succeeded, the other continues to bitch and whine and leech and scapegoat, despite holding considerable political power (unlike non-whites). Lincoln was an autodidact, but being a moron — e.g., Trump — is an admirable character trait for many white evangelicals. So Lincoln doesn't belong to WV or KY, he belongs to MA and IL.

[R.P. McM]

It's a cancer that Lincoln and Grant and Sherman should've eradicated, but now we're stuck with it, sadly.

Lincoln came from a family of poor white trash in the border states.

Nope. Lincoln came from a family of MA puritans — Yankees — who migrated westward. Try again.

His base did yes, but he did not.

He was born in Kentucky (The definition of a border state) and his family was struggling so they moved to Indiana and then to Illinois.

What part of that is incorrect?

I think there's a big difference between the values of the Lincoln family and the Calhoun family, for instance. Being poor doesn't make you 'white trash' — it's more a belligerent, anti-intellectual attitude. It's akin to poor white Southerners in the early-20th century vs. equally poor immigrant Jews. Obviously, one group succeeded, the other continues to bitch and whine and leech and scapegoat, despite holding considerable political power (unlike non-whites). Lincoln was an autodidact, but being a moron — e.g., Trump — is an admirable character trait for many white evangelicals. So Lincoln doesn't belong to WV or KY, he belongs to MA and IL.

Calhoun was from the Deep South not the border states and there was very different ethos between the Mountain, Hill and Border state poor whites and the Planter dominated Deep South. This is overlooked now but there is a long history of them being opposed to each other. For instance strong Mountain Republicanism while the Deep South was the Solid South. Also the border states voted for Clinton while the Deep South went to Dole, and so on. Mountain counties trended towards LBJ because Goldwater pandered too much to the Deep South and blackbelt/urban/low country whites. This is discussed in Kevin Phillips, "The Emerging Republican Majority" from 1969.

These days, there's very little difference between white trash from MS and TN. At one point, there may have been, but nowadays, they're all just uneducated white bigots.

What you said was factually inaccurate on its face. Regardless of any concept of some irrelevant assessment of mentality and temperament, Lincoln's family was one of poor white farmers from the hill country of Kentucky, a border state.

Nope. It's 100% accurate. If my family moved to AL, we wouldn't all suddenly become racist, evangelical, anti-intellectual white trash. We'd feed the animals at the petting zoo, but we wouldn't become them.

Finally to further drive a nail into the coffin of the point I was originally responding to, Lincoln's moderate temperament meant that Lincoln was rather gentle in his plans to deal with the defeated South. His words to Grant were "Let them up easy".

Pfffft. Oh, yes, the South regarded Lincoln as a moderate. He was so moderate, they organized a racist insurrection before he even assumed office. So stupid. No, Lincoln was HATED by the same Southern white conservatives who hated the Civil Rights movement and Barack Obama.

BTW: Lincoln made a mistake. He should've exterminated Southern whites. To paraphrase Trent Lott, we wouldn't have had all of these problems all of these years.

lol dude calm down.

LOL — you think I'm kidding. No, American politics has revolved around race since its inception. I'm suggesting that if we had removed the villains of the story, the world would be a better place. You, for whatever reason, are in denial. I'm sorry, but John Calhoun, Jefferson Davis, Bull Connor, and Strom Thurmond were trash. They contributed nothing to civilization, and deserved to die.

[R.P. McM]

It's a cancer that Lincoln and Grant and Sherman should've eradicated, but now we're stuck with it, sadly.

Lincoln came from a family of poor white trash in the border states.

Nope. Lincoln came from a family of MA puritans — Yankees — who migrated westward. Try again.

His base did yes, but he did not.

He was born in Kentucky (The definition of a border state) and his family was struggling so they moved to Indiana and then to Illinois.

What part of that is incorrect?

I think there's a big difference between the values of the Lincoln family and the Calhoun family, for instance. Being poor doesn't make you 'white trash' — it's more a belligerent, anti-intellectual attitude. It's akin to poor white Southerners in the early-20th century vs. equally poor immigrant Jews. Obviously, one group succeeded, the other continues to bitch and whine and leech and scapegoat, despite holding considerable political power (unlike non-whites). Lincoln was an autodidact, but being a moron — e.g., Trump — is an admirable character trait for many white evangelicals. So Lincoln doesn't belong to WV or KY, he belongs to MA and IL.

Calhoun was from the Deep South not the border states and there was very different ethos between the Mountain, Hill and Border state poor whites and the Planter dominated Deep South. This is overlooked now but there is a long history of them being opposed to each other. For instance strong Mountain Republicanism while the Deep South was the Solid South. Also the border states voted for Clinton while the Deep South went to Dole, and so on. Mountain counties trended towards LBJ because Goldwater pandered too much to the Deep South and blackbelt/urban/low country whites. This is discussed in Kevin Phillips, "The Emerging Republican Majority" from 1969.

These days, there's very little difference between white trash from MS and TN. At one point, there may have been, but nowadays, they're all just uneducated white bigots.

What you said was factually inaccurate on its face. Regardless of any concept of some irrelevant assessment of mentality and temperament, Lincoln's family was one of poor white farmers from the hill country of Kentucky, a border state.

Nope. It's 100% accurate. If my family moved to AL, we wouldn't all suddenly become racist, evangelical, anti-intellectual white trash. We'd feed the animals at the petting zoo, but we wouldn't become them.

Finally to further drive a nail into the coffin of the point I was originally responding to, Lincoln's moderate temperament meant that Lincoln was rather gentle in his plans to deal with the defeated South. His words to Grant were "Let them up easy".

Pfffft. Oh, yes, the South regarded Lincoln as a moderate. He was so moderate, they organized a racist insurrection before he even assumed office. So stupid. No, Lincoln was HATED by the same Southern white conservatives who hated the Civil Rights movement and Barack Obama.

BTW: Lincoln made a mistake. He should've exterminated Southern whites. To paraphrase Trent Lott, we wouldn't have had all of these problems all of these years.

lol dude calm down.

LOL — you think I'm kidding. No, American politics has revolved around race since its inception. I'm suggesting that if we had removed the villains of the story, the world would be a better place. You, for whatever reason, are in denial. I'm sorry, but John Calhoun, Jefferson Davis, Bull Connor, and Strom Thurmond were trash. They contributed nothing to civilization, and deserved to die.

Cool story bra.

I mean, he's not really wrong that those people contributed nothing good to society and deserved to die.

I love you! Yeah, the truth is controversial, evidently. Sadly, the ability to recognize 'white racists = white trash' deeply hurts many Republicans in the Trump era. Sadly. they can't accept that Lee and Goldwater and Wallace and Nixon and Trump believed the same things. 'Cause they're all racist rodents .

[R.P. McM]

When you start exterminating people because you disagree with them, you have surrendered the very ideals that made America a country worth fighting for to begin with.

To quote Lincoln, "Might as well move to Russia or some other place where they are honest about their despotism".

100% wrong, The Union vs. the Confederacy and the Allies vs. the Axis was a wholly political disagreement. One side was righteous but flawed, the other side was despicable subhuman waste. But it was a political disagreement, hombre! Yeah, some of these disagreements are worth dying or killing over, sadly .

[R.P. McM]

You see folks what we have here above is a classic example of subverting history towards one's political ends and throw in a little bit of excessive passion behind it to the point where you misread or complete ignore what the other guy is trying to say and then you have this mess.


The South Hated Lincoln? You don't Say! There used to be a pic for this but we cannot have nice things anymore, because money.

What I said had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the South hated Lincoln, it talked about how Lincoln's politics and temperment were one of moderation. Lincoln initially ran on just restricting slavery to where it already existed, this moderation was not aimed at making the South like him for various reasons this was even more offensive to the South than abolition, but that is a story for another post.

This moderation was aimed at the very swing voters that would decide a state like Illinois and also Pennsylvania, where the Republicans had strong bases in the Northern parts of these states and in PA, in the Philly area, but were getting drowned elsewhere in these states. Lincoln being a border stater with a more moderate position, could peal off enough votes and also get a few hold out former Whigs to hop on board with his economic nationalism (yes Lincoln was a committed economic nationalist) and allow him to narrowly eak out a win in these crucially decisive states.

Towards the end of the war, Lincoln desired to try and restore the union, extermination was neither realistic, nor on the menu for even the most radical Republicans like Thaddeus Stevens and thus such represent little more than the fanciful delusions of extremists.

Racism, bigotry and nativism and economic nationalism are not exclusive to the South and as much as you can hate on Southerners for being on the wrong side of history, just remember it was the South that ensured Freedom of Religion through Thomas Jefferson, it was the South that routinely opposed the interests of banks, it was the South's Representatives the produced Glass Steagal and it was the South that made the Populist and eventual progressive takeover over of the Democratic Party possible.

The south is historically the most economically left-wing, populist region of the country. Arkansas and Oklahoma were hotbeds of socialism. There would have been no New Deal without the South. Poor whites of southern origin, the people that RP McM wants to exterminate, were recognized by Black Panthers and similar groups as an oppressed people, and a natural ally of the revolutionary rainbow coalition. Maybe what has driven them toward right-wing politics in recent decades is that the American "left" regards them as the scum of the earth and is obsessed with destroying their cherished cultural symbol, the Confederate flag? Most are still left economically.

Pfffffffffft! Hahahaha! Yep — that's a plausible interpretation! Confederate flag: left-wing symbol /s. Hahahahahahahahahahaha! yeah, we're gonna destroy that and a whole lot more!!!

[R.P. McM]

I mean, it's worth noting that usually the winners of a war do take revenge on the losers (history is written by the winners and what not). Especially in Civil Wars, where first order of business for the new government is usually to purge (counter)-revolutionaries and people from the old regime by executing them, sending them to concentration camps, etc.

The fact that the US circa 1866 didn't round up the confederate elite and sympathisers and execute them (or send them to concentration camps or jail at the very least) should be seen as an exception. Even for a democracy, normally pro-confederate sentiments would have been banned.

The American Constitution doesn't allow for banning sentiments. It was this constitution that we did in fact fight a war to preserve and thus it would be the height of historical tragedies if after the deaths of 600,000 people, we gave that up and became just like every other country.

I have no sympathy for treason or secession. I do not condone the Lost Cause and have devoted many an effort post to tearing it a new one, but there is a difference between rejecting the lost cause, decrying the horrible hypocrisy on which the Confederacy and condoning or establishing the mass extermination of the entire Southern population.

It wouldn't be "mass extermination of the Southern population". At worst you'd get "mass extermination of the Southern government", but the average Southerner wouldn't be affected for the most part. Think of Germany right after WW2 and the de-nazification policies that followed (probably an anachronism but whatever)

So you'd get whatever the equivalent of the Nuremberg trials would have been, plus people involved in the confederate cause would have lost their jobs and probably their property; plus an extra dose of censorship. The confederate flag would probably be looked at as the Nazi flag is in Germany, where just flying it would get you in trouble.

Of course I imagine this would probably enter into conflict with several provisions of the constitution, but I imagine either an activist court would get around those or constitutional amendments would be passed.

That is not what R.P. McM was saying though.

No, that's fine. I was a bit inebriated. But yeah, postwar Germany would've been a great model for the post-bellum South. But they rejected it, rejected their own responsibility/guilt. Which is why we find ourselves in the current situation. A longer Northern occupation, ending the Senate, or making the South one state with two senators would've been my preferred solution. Obviously, we couldn't let them retain their slaves or align with their ideological peers — the Nazis — some years down the line, so draconian measures were in order.

[R.P. McM]

Confederate flag: left-wing symbol /s. Hahahahahahahahahahaha! yeah, we're gonna destroy that and a whole lot more!!!

Yeah, that's persuasive /s.

[R.P. McM]

When you start exterminating people because you disagree with them, you have surrendered the very ideals that made America a country worth fighting for to begin with.

To quote Lincoln, "Might as well move to Russia or some other place where they are honest about their despotism".

100% wrong, The Union vs. the Confederacy and the Allies vs. the Axis was a wholly political disagreement. One side was righteous but flawed, the other side was despicable pieces of subhuman waste. But it was a political disagreement, hombre! Yeah, some of these disagreements are worth dying or killing over, sadly .

When you have succumb to mass extermination of political opponents, you have exceeded the boundaries upon which America was founded.

Hahahahaha! Except for the slaves and the Native Americans, right?! So, so, so, so, so stupid, it hurts! No, if you can perpetrate genocide against Natives or Africans, you can surely liquidate evangelical, white trash fascists! They aren't my fellow countrymen, and they deserve to die!

Honestly, to be frank with you, knowing what I know now: I'd rather that William Tecumseh Sherman had hanged y'all than Jesse Helms had assumed a Senate seat. Sorry

Again I was born in Pennsylvania and grew up between there and New York. Technically that makes me a carpetbagger. I have only been in a church twice in my entire life (both for funerals), I never liked Jesse Helms and I don't appreciate your presumptuous arrogance.

So North Carolinians didn't elect and reelect Jesse Helms and a bunch of other segregationists? Yeah, they did, and they're responsible for it. Personal responsibility may be an alien concept to the Trump Party, but it says pretty awful things about the electorate of NC. They probably didn't deserve equal representation to the folks who elected Lincoln and FDR and LBJ and F.B. Olson and HHH and Mondale. Still don't, frankly. Sorry.

Are you implying that the North was not complicit in genocide of the Native Americans? Including one William T. Sherman?

Also Sherman was very lenient on the south after the war, so much so that ANDREW JOHNSON, thought he had gone too far in his peace deal with Joe Johnston and was too easy on the rebs. Sherman was also pro-slavery and had lived in the South before the war and he actually preferred Southern Culture to the North's. But go on talking about how he was going to exterminate it.  

Yeah, that's an impressively idiotic series of strawmen. Don't remember ever endorsing the North's Likud-esque treatment of the Natives. And Sherman would've followed orders, personal sentiments aside. Also: it's hard to believe that he had greater respect for the South when he warned them, prewar, that they couldn't mass-produce a pair of shoes and were destined to lose. Sounds like he's calling them stupid, belligerent monkeys. Which, tbh ...

[R.P. McM]

^ Kind of ironic coming from me, but this isn’t worth arguing with him.  You have provided this forum so much more knowledge, fresh perspective and much needed correction on more occasions than we can count.  This angry boi won’t be the last teenager who joins this forum to scream at us all how he knows everything and is entitled to frankly disgusting views because of it.

Tom, to be quite frank, you're the sort of person who, in times of great moral crisis, maintains his neutrality. You love to whine when I viciously attack Confederates and Segregationists and Nazis and Nazi-praising Republican presidents, never once seriously addressing their staggering moral culpability. Did the people who started a war to preserve the barbaric institution of slavery, killing hundreds of thousands of Americans in the process, deserve some rather harsh treatment? Absolutely. They were monsters, pure and simple. But you're the sort of go-along-to-get-along type that betrayed AA's in the South during Reconstruction, or excused the conservative German establishment for elevating Adolph Hitler. To you, morality is more a function of popular opinion, and people who raise hell when abominable acts are being committed are hysterical or unhinged. You're perfectly emblematic of today's Republican Party, so pat yourself on the back.

[R.P. McM]

Considering you just got moderated for using that word don't you think you better stop using it?


Also, I am not responsible for what NC Did in the 1980's and 1990's, because
1. I was born in 1991 in Pennsylvania
2. Didn't set foot in NC until 2002 at age eleven, and I didn't exactly have a choice in the move
3. Wasn't registered to vote until 2010

I think you're missing the point — the state of NC is responsible. For electing Confederates, segregationists, and empowering a political party to, in the words of the 4th Circuit, enact voter suppression measures designed to "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision." That was three years ago! Same old BS. So yeah, when I suggest that maybe the electorate of NC isn't yet morally or intellectually equipped to participate in our national debate — and certainly wasn't from 1850 to 1950 — I genuinely mean it.

[R.P. McM]

^ Kind of ironic coming from me, but this isn’t worth arguing with him.  You have provided this forum so much more knowledge, fresh perspective and much needed correction on more occasions than we can count.  This angry boi won’t be the last teenager who joins this forum to scream at us all how he knows everything and is entitled to frankly disgusting views because of it.

Tom, to be quite frank, you're the sort of person who, in times of great moral crisis, maintains his neutrality. You love to whine when I viciously attack Confederates and Segregationists and Nazis and Nazi-praising Republican presidents, never once seriously addressing their staggering moral culpability. Did people who started a war to preserve the barbaric institution of slavery, killing hundreds of thousands of Americans in the process, deserve some rather harsh treatment? Absolutely. They were monsters, pure and simple. But you're the sort of go-along-to-get-along type that betrayed AA's in the South during Reconstruction, or excused the conservative German establishment for elevating Adolph Hitler. To you, morality is more a function of popular opinion, and people who raise hell when abominable acts are being committed are hysterical or unhinged. You're perfectly emblematic of today's Republican Party, so pat yourself on the back.

You haven't once read what I have said in this thread, so one can hardly be surprised that he doesn't find your righteous outrage sincere when you spent a week trying to pin the confederacy on one of the most anti-confederate Republicans on this forum, its even in my name username.

You were the last person I would want by my side in crisis because you let your passion get ahead of the facts.

You see a blue NC avatar and think you know everything about that person. Then you don't listen to a damn thing thing they say and just keep swinging at him and others and even going so far as to violate the Terms of Service in the process with personal attacks more befitting the type you are criticizing.

No, see, the difference is, I think the election of an openly racist rapist in the 21st century is a crisis. But you folks are fine with it. Tom spends ALL of his time grousing at folks like me, who are appalled at the actions of the political party he aligns with. An American president praising Nazis?! You've got to be f**king kidding me. But again, you guys never attack the individuals who put you in the position to answer for this BS, just the folks who aren't willing to hide their righteous disgust and indignation.

I should add, as an addendum, that one of the reasons I go so hard at Southerners, evangelicals, and other racially retrograde whites is that I myself am Caucasian. So it deeply embarrasses me to see white people behaving in such a disgraceful manner. The possibility of being associated with them sickens me, frankly. I work with a bunch of immigrants and non-whites, and I literally have to explain to them that I'm not one of those white people. Which is depressing and demeaning. You and Tom should try applying the same logic to the Trump Party.

[R.P. McM]

Considering you just got moderated for using that word don't you think you better stop using it?


Also, I am not responsible for what NC Did in the 1980's and 1990's, because
1. I was born in 1991 in Pennsylvania
2. Didn't set foot in NC until 2002 at age eleven, and I didn't exactly have a choice in the move
3. Wasn't registered to vote until 2010

I think you're missing the point — the state of NC is responsible. For electing Confederates, segregationists, and empowering a political party to, in the words of the 4th Circuit, enact voter suppression measures designed to "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision." That was two years ago! Same old BS. So yeah, when I suggest that maybe the electorate of NC isn't yet morally or intellectually equipped to participate in our national debate — and certainly wasn't from 1850 to 1950 — I genuinely mean it.

If I could afford to move back North, I would, I don't appreciate you treating me like crap just because I am not rich.

I'm not wealthy either, and I do genuinely appreciate your contributions to this forum. But you have to understand, when the de facto leader of your political party does and says appalling things, you can't expect the rest of us to remain silent. Nor can you expect the rest of us to make exceptions for the ~10% of Republicans that oppose Trump. We're going to attack, and that attack is perfectly justified. In fact, had the Democratic Party elected such an odious creature, I would fully expect Republicans to do likewise. And I'd probably switch my party registration in the process.