american history part deux

Help Support CattleToday:

Status
Not open for further replies.
But he kicked a$$ when he got the nomination:

Nominee Abraham Lincoln John C. Breckinridge
Party Republican Southern Democratic
Home state Illinois Kentucky
Running mate Hannibal Hamlin Joseph Lane
Electoral vote 180 72
States carried 18 11
Popular vote 1,865,908 848,019

And then the shyt hit the fan.
 
TexasBred":1bp51xba said:
But he kicked a$$ when he got the nomination:

Nominee Abraham Lincoln John C. Breckinridge
Party Republican Southern Democratic
Home state Illinois Kentucky
Running mate Hannibal Hamlin Joseph Lane
Electoral vote 180 72
States carried 18 11
Popular vote 1,865,908 848,019

And then the shyt hit the fan.


You left off several candidates.
Lincoln ran against Brenkinridge Southern Democrat, Douglas Northern Democrat and Bell from the Constitutional Union Party. All three men running against Lincoln were from the fractured Democratic Party.

Him getting the Republican nomination had little to do with him winning.
In 1860 issues broke the Democratic Party into Northern and Southern factions, and a new Constitutional Union Party appeared. In the face of a divided opposition, the Republican Party, dominant in the North, secured a majority of the electoral votes, putting Abraham Lincoln in the White House with almost no support from the South.

The split of the Democratic Party revolved around the Missouri Compromise.
Again it was about who controlled the House. The in fighting in the House is the only reason Lincoln won.
 
Hayes lost to Tilden, but got elected by one electoral vote. Hayes then ended reconstruction.
 
backhoeboogie":2udextfc said:
Hayes lost to Tilden, but got elected by one electoral vote. Hayes then ended reconstruction.

Reconstruction what a joke just another definition of dividing the spoils of war.
It didn't matter that Lincoln got nominated by the Republican Party they could have nominated
Quannah Parker and he would have won. The wheels were coming off the wagon no
matter. If Breckinridge had won the wheels were still coming off.

The version of Lincoln and the events they teach in history sound grand but in reality
a untruth. It all went back to who controlled the house and who was going to control
the presidency.
 
What my ancestors endured happened on Lincoln's watch. There were no fair trials. Read the diaries

Emancipation Proclamation happened Nearly three years after the Civil War started. Not the other way around. History books don't touch that either.
 
sim.-ang.king":3r901ff1 said:
Should of picked your own cotton if you didn't like what happen...


If you think that war was over slavery or states rights you were well indoctrinated in school.
Don't think you Yankee boys were Lilly White when it came to slavery either.
James DeWolf (March 18, 1764 – December 21, 1837), was a slave trader and a pirate during the War of 1812, and a state and national politician. He gained notoriety in 1791 when indicted for murdering a slave said to have smallpox, whom he said threatened the lives of all of the other slaves and crew because of the disease. The case was ultimately dismissed and was considered justifiable under contemporary law. During his lifetime, his name was usually written 'James D'Wolf'.
He served as a long-time state legislator for several periods, for a total of nearly 25 years, and in the 1820s as a United States senator from Rhode Island for much of a term. Together with the slave trade, DeWolf invested in sugar and coffee plantations in Cuba and became the wealthiest man in his state; by the end of his life, he was said to be the second-richest person in the entire United States.
 
Caustic Burno":3oltwi9j said:
sim.-ang.king":3oltwi9j said:
Should of picked your own cotton if you didn't like what happen...


If you think that war was over slavery or states rights you were well indoctrinated in school.
Don't think you Yankee boys were Lilly White when it came to slavery either.
James DeWolf (March 18, 1764 – December 21, 1837), was a slave trader and a pirate during the War of 1812, and a state and national politician. He gained notoriety in 1791 when indicted for murdering a slave said to have smallpox, whom he said threatened the lives of all of the other slaves and crew because of the disease. The case was ultimately dismissed and was considered justifiable under contemporary law. During his lifetime, his name was usually written 'James D'Wolf'.
He served as a long-time state legislator for several periods, for a total of nearly 25 years, and in the 1820s as a United States senator from Rhode Island for much of a term. Together with the slave trade, DeWolf invested in sugar and coffee plantations in Cuba and became the wealthiest man in his state; by the end of his life, he was said to be the second-richest person in the entire United States.
How do you know I was only talking about southerns? Plenty of "yankees" that weren't to pleased with the civil war.
 
The war was over power and money.
As far as picking your own cotton the majority of the Southerns didn't own any
less than one in four were slave owners. The Northern's had there share as well
just like D'Wolf getting rich off the trade and owning plantations in the Caribbean operated on slave labor that went on for
years after the war. Follow the dollar.
Many Americans were no different than the Germans under Hitler following the Pied Piper.
Federal troops shoot down citizens in the street of Baltimore opposed to the war.
 
And Andersonville was all roses.
So what were the southerns fighting for? You just told me it wasn't states rights.
So did they just feel like killing?
 
sim.-ang.king":3cg73xt3 said:
And Andersonville was all roses.
So what were the southerns fighting for? You just told me it wasn't states rights.
So did they just feel like killing?

The South chose to secede the North chose to fight.
Had they not there would be two countries today.
The South didn't want the north it was the other way around.
Without the South there could be no filling of the Manifest Destiny that is another issue.
That was used more than once to go to war the first time with Mexico.
Kinda of hypocritical when we say every nation in the world has the right to split but us.

This little issue right here lies the crux of the matter and it is not taught in history as well.
Southern power derived from a combination of factors. The "three-fifths clause" (counting 100 slaves as 60 people for seats in the House and thus for electoral votes) gave the South additional representation at the national level. Parity in the Senate was critical, whereby a new slave state was admitted in tandem with a new free state. Regional unity across party lines was essential on key votes. In the Democratic party, a presidential candidate had to carry the national convention by a two-thirds vote to get nominated. The Northern Democrats were losing power and the ability to be nominated.

Again it was about power.
 
History has proven the South was right. Just look at the mess we have now because of the Yankees.
 
The real irony here is Richard Lee drafted the preamble in his motion for independence.
Lee's resolution and the final push making him a Patriot.
Richard Lee and his brother Francis were the only two brothers to sign the Declaration of Independence.
Again making them Patriots to fight against the Tyranny of the day.
Now this is where the hypocrisy is thick as honey less than 100 years later their nephew and grandson
is viewed in the history books as a traitor for the exact same actions Robert E. Lee.

"On the same day that Congress passed Adams's radical preamble, the Virginia Convention set the stage for a formal Congressional declaration of independence. On May 15, the Convention instructed Virginia's congressional delegation "to propose to that respectable body to declare the United Colonies free and independent States, absolved from all allegiance to, or dependence upon, the Crown or Parliament of Great Britain".In accordance with those instructions, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia presented a three-part resolution to Congress on June 7. The motion, which was seconded by John Adams, called on Congress to declare independence, form foreign alliances, and prepare a plan of colonial confederation. The part of the resolution relating to declaring independence read:
Resolved, that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved."




It ended up reading like this in the final draft.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
 
sim.-ang.king":2x3rt2np said:
Should of picked your own cotton if you didn't like what happen...
Spoken like a true Blue Il. Lincoln lover. And that right there is the perfect example of why I hate that craphole st. Their narrow view of what a Great man he was and all the wonderful things he did :dunce: Look at the view's of the idiot in the white house now, and what state was he a senator from ?? OH ya IL. Slavery was not the real reason for the civil war, just a artificial reason to rally the north in support of a war. JMO but the Texan's are the ones that got screwed the worst from that deal .
 
Jalopy":2knwqv7j said:
Remember history is written by the victors in any situation. And justified by the non victors.
"non victor", is that the PC term for loser?
 
retro":27bu4be5 said:
sim.-ang.king":27bu4be5 said:
Should of picked your own cotton if you didn't like what happen...
Spoken like a true Blue Il. Lincoln lover. And that right there is the perfect example of why I hate that craphole st. Their narrow view of what a Great man he was and all the wonderful things he did :dunce: Look at the view's of the idiot in the white house now, and what state was he a senator from ?? OH ya IL. Slavery was not the real reason for the civil war, just a artificial reason to rally the north in support of a war. JMO but the Texan's are the ones that got screwed the worst from that deal .

The ones cast out of Texas took it the worst. The Republic paid veterans with land. They sold land for schools and colleges. Some of that land was in the panhandle that went up thru Colorado into Wyoming. New Mexico too. That part was chopped off. Veterans were now in a territory. Why oh why did we ever agree to this?
 
Caustic Burno":280zkmi0 said:
TexasBred":280zkmi0 said:
But he kicked a$$ when he got the nomination:

Nominee Abraham Lincoln John C. Breckinridge
Party Republican Southern Democratic
Home state Illinois Kentucky
Running mate Hannibal Hamlin Joseph Lane
Electoral vote 180 72
States carried 18 11
Popular vote 1,865,908 848,019

And then the shyt hit the fan.


You left off several candidates.
Lincoln ran against Brenkinridge Southern Democrat, Douglas Northern Democrat and Bell from the Constitutional Union Party. All three men running against Lincoln were from the fractured Democratic Party.

Him getting the Republican nomination had little to do with him winning.
In 1860 issues broke the Democratic Party into Northern and Southern factions, and a new Constitutional Union Party appeared. In the face of a divided opposition, the Republican Party, dominant in the North, secured a majority of the electoral votes, putting Abraham Lincoln in the White House with almost no support from the South.

The split of the Democratic Party revolved around the Missouri Compromise.
Again it was about who controlled the House. The in fighting in the House is the only reason Lincoln won.

CB that's just how elections worked at that time. I believe Ross Perot insured GW Bush's election the one time as a third candidate and then it had to go to the supreme court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top