Can we sue the Democratic Party for reperations

[SuperDemocrat]

we all know that the Democratic Party supported slavery and up until the 1960s they supported Jim crow. It may seem impossible to sue the Democratic Party for reperations but there are precedence in which old corporations that had its hand in slavery had to pay reperations for its past actions. Would those precedence apply to the Democratic Party?

 

[percysunshine]

.
Interesting idea.

If it ever pans out, count on the Democrat Party to pay for it with other peoples money.

.

 

[BluesLegend]

Dem's will claim they are broke and can't pay, while parking a billion dollars in a 'charitable foundation'.

 

[Pogo]

we all know that the Democratic Party supported slavery and up until the 1960s they supported Jim crow. It may seem impossible to sue the Democratic Party for reperations but there are precedence in which old corporations that had its hand in slavery had to pay reperations for its past actions. Would those precedence apply to the Democratic Party?

Uh .... no, we don't know that. Go read some history.

 

[Obiwan]

we all know that the Democratic Party supported slavery and up until the 1960s they supported Jim crow. It may seem impossible to sue the Democratic Party for reperations but there are precedence in which old corporations that had its hand in slavery had to pay reperations for its past actions. Would those precedence apply to the Democratic Party?

Uh .... no, we don't know that. Go read some history.

So you actually think the slave owners were Republicans and voted for Lincoln? RFLMAO !!!!!

 

[Pogo]

we all know that the Democratic Party supported slavery and up until the 1960s they supported Jim crow. It may seem impossible to sue the Democratic Party for reperations but there are precedence in which old corporations that had its hand in slavery had to pay reperations for its past actions. Would those precedence apply to the Democratic Party?

Uh .... no, we don't know that. Go read some history.

So you actually think the slave owners were Republicans and voted for Lincoln? RFLMAO !!!!!

Uh...nnnnnno Sparky. They voted for Breckinridge and Bell -- their own candidates.

You see, the South wasn't down with the Democratic Party in 1860, although they had little choice. The RP, just six years old, had taken on the Whig/Free Soiler abolitionist position, so that was out, but the DP was also unacceptable. So they completely disrupted the convention to the point where it had to be shut down and rescheduled. They then proceeded to run their own candidates (B&B) who won the entire South while Lincoln won almost all the rest. The Democrat, Steven Douglas, won one state-- Missouri.

The racists of the South were never comfortable with the DP (and certainly never with Liberals), but it was all they had, since there was no way they were about to associate with the party of Lincoln, the guy who had defeated and humiliated them. So they disrupted and broke off frequently --- a few incidents off the top of my head:

1860... (described above)

1924.... Ku Klux Klan disrupts convention to stop the nomination of Sen.. Oscar Underwood (D-AL), prominent candidate and leading voice of denouncing the Klan;

1928.... Klan again disrupts convention to oppose candidacy of Al Smith because he was a Catholic (unsuccessfully);

1948... South walks out of DP convention after hearing platform rhetoric on civil rights from Truman and Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey, South starts their own party, runs Strom Thurmond as candidate, who takes several states in the South and nearly costs Truman the election (this was what Trent Lott, former Democrat, referred to at Thurmond's 100th birthday party that got him in trouble)

1964... South "files for divorce" as Thurmond, upset with the passage of the CRA, does what was for 99 years unthinkable and switches to Republican, followed in the next years by the rest of the racists from Jesse Helms to David Duke

also in '64, George Wallace petitions Barry Goldwater to be his running mate; Goldwater declines and has to talk Wallace out of running his own breakaway campaign lest it siphon off Goldwater votes in the South; Goldwater wins five Southern states in election, first electoral crack in DP's hold of the South;

1968... beginning of "Southern Strategy" by RP to take advantage of "divorce" and mine for voters, Nixon using euphemism "law and order"; George Wallace runs own campaign under independent American party, wins several Southern states;

1972 - Wallace running again, by now Southern voter registration is in sea change; Wallace shot in assassination attempt, American Party ticket runs Congressman John Schmitz (R-CA) with no impact; Nixon takes entire South;

1980 - Ronald Reagan kicks off Presidential campaign with symbolic significance in Philadelphia, Mississipppi, site of the infamous KKK slaying of three civil rights activists, using euphemism "states' rights". Party sea change complete.

A messy bipolar relationship that went on for a century, representing two entirely different social ideologies in the South and in the Rest. Because the function of a political party is not to represent an ideology; it is to acquire power. If that means telling you "the sky is blue" because that's what you want to hear and telling me "the sky is green" because that's what I want to hear in order to get both our votes, then that's what they do. Until it blows up. DP did it up to 50 years ago; RP did it after that. It's how political parties work.

Sorry if this isn't the "my first coloring book" level of simplicity. Simple just ain't what it is.

Anything else?