Hotter, Badder, and Unpopularer Takes

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Vegetables are bad for you.

Not if you're named Daniel.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Vegetables are bad for you.

Not if you're named Daniel.

Impressive Biblical reference, especially for a... semi-heretic.

Semi?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Anyone who argues "The Civil War was about state's rights" is just being a troll

You think this claim is hot? That's like the default position of 80% of Atlas.

Maybe 80% of Atlas Republicans, definitely not 80% of Atlas.  Besides, you forget we have quite a few posters here who don't automatically think of the Counterrevolutionary War for Slaveholders' Rights when they hear the phrase "Civil War". The British War for Divine Right and the World War II dress rehearsal come to mind.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Anyone who argues "The Civil War was about state's rights" is just being a troll

You think this claim is hot? That's like the default position of 80% of Atlas.

Maybe 80% of Atlas Republicans, definitely not 80% of Atlas.  Besides, you forget we have quite a few posters here who don't automatically think of the Counterrevolutionary War for Slaveholders' Rights when they hear the phrase "Civil War". The British War for Divine Right and the World War II dress rehearsal come to mind.

80% of Atlas Republicans absolutely do not believe that.  49% of ACTUAL Republicans say slavery was the main cause (which, I guarantee implies that a very healthy majority of Republicans outside of the South agree with this ... no?), so I would imagine Atlas Republicans would be even higher.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/us150722/CivilWar/McClatchy-Marist%20Poll_National%20Release%20and%20Tables_The%20Confederate%20Flag_August%202015.pdf

You have a higher opinion of posters here than I do.  That said, I used 80% only because that was the figure given for Atlas as a whole in the post I quoted.

However, I must take objection to the idea that Northern whites are generally better on racial issues.  The reason Northern voters generally preferred the Republicans in 1860 was definitely not that they thought Blacks should be free, they were more interested in making certain they stayed in the South. For many Republican voters in 1860, the only good things about Blacks were that they weren't Catholics or Jews.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What I AM saying is that, undoubtedly, the belief that the Civil War was not primarily about slavery is MUCH more prevalent in the South than in another regions of the country, mostly among White Southerners.

In the absence of actual polling numbers, I'll certainly doubt it as it sounds to me like just another variant of the "noble Northerners" hagiography that tries to paint racism as a uniquely Southern characteristic.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What I AM saying is that, undoubtedly, the belief that the Civil War was not primarily about slavery is MUCH more prevalent in the South than in another regions of the country, mostly among White Southerners.

In the absence of actual polling numbers, I'll certainly doubt it as it sounds to me like just another variant of the "noble Northerners" hagiography that tries to paint racism as a uniquely Southern characteristic.

I don’t think it’s that as much as regional tribalism.  Would you seriously question the assumption that there is zero regional correlation between a Republicans’ views on this?  I mean, that’d imply 49% of Southern Republicans responded that way.  Could be, but I’d be surprised.

As was posted in the post between ours, the real outlier is the West, which of the four Census regions is the one whose inhabitants least define themselves by what happened in the Civil War. I think the numbers for the Northeast and Midwest reflect that the primary war aim of the North was not to destroy Slavery but to preserve the Union. However, there would've been no need for a war to preserve the Union if the South had not attempted secession to preserve Slavery. So while slavery was not the issue that galvanized the North into fighting, it was the issue that made a fight not only possible but inevitable.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Anyone who argues "The Civil War was about state's rights" is just being a troll

You think this claim is hot? That's like the default position of 80% of Atlas.

Maybe 80% of Atlas Republicans, definitely not 80% of Atlas.  Besides, you forget we have quite a few posters here who don't automatically think of the Counterrevolutionary War for Slaveholders' Rights when they hear the phrase "Civil War". The British War for Divine Right and the World War II dress rehearsal come to mind.

80% of Atlas Republicans absolutely do not believe that.  49% of ACTUAL Republicans say slavery was the main cause (which, I guarantee implies that a very healthy majority of Republicans outside of the South agree with this ... no?), so I would imagine Atlas Republicans would be even higher.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/us150722/CivilWar/McClatchy-Marist%20Poll_National%20Release%20and%20Tables_The%20Confederate%20Flag_August%202015.pdf

You have a higher opinion of posters here than I do.  That said, I used 80% only because that was the figure given for Atlas as a whole in the post I quoted.

However, I must take objection to the idea that Northern whites are generally better on racial issues.  The reason Northern voters generally preferred the Republicans in 1860 was definitely not that they thought Blacks should be free, they were more interested in making certain they stayed in the South. For many Republican voters in 1860, the only good things about Blacks were that they weren't Catholics or Jews.

I take objection to your objection. Obviously the Northern whites were made up of multitudes and even the unionists had their various reasons for supporting the cause. But to argue the defense of the Union was merely a cynical enterprise of Know Nothings falls short. Are we supposed to believe the radical evangelicals who sprung up in their multitudes in the 1820's and 30's demanding immediate emancipation were merely nativist scum? As for the Union soldiers, a lot of them essentially became radicalized as the war approached and dragged on: what started as mere patriotic outrage at the South for attacking the flag broadened into moral denunciations of slavery as an institution (this is according to James McPherson's research).

Multitudes? Out and out abolitionists were decidedly a minority in the north pre-Civil War. Yes, many Union soldiers became abolitionist during the war, but for many it was because they came to the conclusion that ending slavery was necessary to preserve the Union rather than other reasons.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The 2022 midterms might not be bad for democrats. The senate map is more lopsided than 2018 was for the GOP, the economy has a good chance of being in recovery, the storming the capital is going to be easy attack as fodder, and Trump is going to try and make it about him which could charge dem suburban turnout

This far out anywhere from D+4 to R+5 is possible for the Senate, tho anything beyond a 2 seat swing in either direction is highly speculative and dependent upon what happens.