Northern vs Southern Democrats on Slavery

Is that your official stance?:eusa_whistle:


It's simple, yes.

It covers each group in explanations most can understand.

It is generally recognized as a truthful explanation.

It is all time allows me to post.

I will add- Since most in the Southerners didn't own slaves, rich influencial slave owners worked hard to convince the non-slave-owning population that the main problem was the feds acting as bullies and promoted the states' rights issue as the reason conflict was needed.


You are so fucking far off it's laughable.


In what way?
 
The Southern White Conservative Democrats left the DNC into the open arms of the GOP. The Southern Strategy of the GOP kept White Southerners in power on a national level.

The Republican party of Lincoln ended up disappearing when Reagan helped chase out the Northern Lincoln/Rockefeller Liberals out of the GOP

I understand your desperation to redefine the democrats from the paternalistic overseers who owned, yet cared for their keep; to some sort of "free market" champions who just happened to own slaves and oppose market forces. But you do realize that anyone with a modicum of intellect recognizes you as abysmally stupid and devoid of any historical perspective, right?

your imbecility is showing... :redface:
 
your imbecility is showing... :redface:

The problem with the mentally retarded, i.e. you, is that while you can be trained to regurgitate talking points, you really have no clue what they mean.

As a drone, the most you can do is relay a concept to the hive, and let the group decide what it means; so relay this to your masters, Dante; Slavery defies the concepts of a free and uncoerced market. It cannot be "conservative" by simple fact that it is a paternalistic and authoritarian systems.
 

Forum List

Back
Top