- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 5th Grade Social Studies: Abraham Lincoln
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:10 pm to Dale51
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:10 pm to Dale51
quote:
What are you basing that claim on?
Ask yourself: How did the deep south vote in the electoral college back then? Then ask yourself how they vote today. It's pretty simple. I'll admit that it over generalizes by disregarding the specific issues faced by society at the time of their respective prevalence, but it's still a fact that, at least as states, the same one's voting republican today were voting democrat back in the day.
3
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:10 pm to el Gaucho
quote:
I hate when you people....
Who are "you people"? Can you describe them?
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:12 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
quote: What in the hell do southern democrats living after Lincoln have to do with this teachers statements as perceived by my son? First, calm down. Your son needs to hear opposing ideologies, however, it's too early for his teacher to say what she did. To answer your question, the voters that comprise the parties have largely switched places.
You keep saying this..the republicans who elected Lincoln are dead..I understand your points about segregation..but the fact is that isn't the only issue or even the primary issue TODAY. You are talking about events 50+ years in the past with your descriptions of the parties.
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:12 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
She's right, you know. There was an ideological shift that happened between the two parties.
Do you even Dinesh D'sousa, bro?
You can either read "Hillary's America," or watch the film, or view a number of speeches on YouTube where he basically annihilates the notion of a "big switch."
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:15 pm to TigernMS12
quote:
the same one's voting republican today were voting democrat back in the day.
Not sure what your point is supposed to be. Are you stuck on the words Democrat and Republican? If it's not that but values..then nothing has changed. The democr5ats "back in the day" were the slave pushers...and today they still are. They just talk like they are on the side of the "downtrodden"..but do all they can to keep them down. They just want their votes. Just my opinion...others may feel differently.
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:15 pm to TigernMS12
quote:
quote:
What are you basing that claim on?
Ask yourself: How did the deep south vote in the electoral college back then? Then ask yourself how they vote today. It's pretty simple. I'll admit that it over generalizes by disregarding the specific issues faced by society at the time of their respective prevalence, but it's still a fact that, at least as states, the same one's voting republican today were voting democrat back in the day.
And many voted democrat as recently as 1992...hell carter won the entire south in 1976
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:16 pm to Dawgfanman
Wtf! Please sit down with your kid and fix that...
This post was edited on 11/14/16 at 6:17 pm
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:17 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
She's right, you know. There was an ideological shift that happened between the two parties
nope
Unless you're doing to tell me FDR fought for low taxes, smaller government and less regulation
Wait. . . Wtf?
Abraham Lincoln didnt fight for any of those things.
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:22 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:They are in this thread. So is slavery.
Segregation and Civil Rights are not an issue
Drawing equation of Lincoln's Republicans with today's Democrats is as nonsensical as drawing lineage between Nazis and Merkel's Christian Democrats. Their foundations do not align
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:26 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
Perhaps his belief in God or simply decency would have kept him away from the godless, heaten filled Democratic Party..
Lincoln was a tyrant who butchered the constitution more than any other president. And that includes Obama. I believe that Lincoln was probably opposed personally to slavery. But that is not why he opposed the expansion of slavery. Lincoln stated himself that the constitution would not allow him to abolish slavery where it already existed. Lincoln was interested in the expansion of the empire to the west. It is known that he wanted to populate the western territories with the white European immigrants and he wanted the land, jobs and opportunities reserved for them. He even said so. His support of high tariffs to finance the internal improvement projects that would enhance the industrialization of those areas made his railroad Barron friends wealthy. The expansion of slavery threatened that scenario. 80% of all federal revenue came from tariffs generated in the Southern ports. He needed that money to finance his internal improvement projects to enhance western expansion and northern industrialization. When the South seceded they initiated free trade with little to no tarrifs in the ports. Guess where tarrifs were collected? And guess where the vast majority of ports were located. Lincoln would be left with about two ports that could collect tarrifs if he let the South go. That is the main reason that he chose to re-supply Fort Sumter. If he held the fort he could still try and collect tarrifs for the federal government. Lincoln initiated the Emancipation for three reasons: 1. To weaken the southern economy and their ability to wage war. 2. To stop England and France from recognizing the Confederacy 3. The Emancipation allowed the enlistment of 200,000 former slaves into Union ranks. Lincoln needed soldiers.
This post was edited on 11/14/16 at 6:45 pm
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:32 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
I've got history papers to grade.
You're a history teacher? Great! What do you think of Howard Zinn's version of history? I hear it's all the rage in many schools.
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:33 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:You just conceded.
And many voted democrat as recently as 1992...hell carter won the entire south in 1976
Carter - southern democrat
Clinton - southern democrat
Enough of the new Republicans at the time felt comfortable voting for someone who seemingly represented what the south used to be--solidly democratic.
The other Carter and Clinton voters were still southern democrats who had not made the transfer yet.
Example: LOUISIANA voted Democrat in 1996. Most of those people are now Republican.
It's not that hard to figure out.
sources: southern politics poli sci class. We studied EVERY election in detail from the 1930s on.
undergraduate degree: history
graduate degree: history (southern emphasis)
current job: US History teacher
And your credentials are? I really don't like being such an insufferable douche, but you leave me no choice.
Don't worry, I don't steer our youth wrong...
This post was edited on 11/14/16 at 6:35 pm
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:37 pm to Dale51
quote:A People's History of the United States? I've never had the misfortune of reading it. But I agree that it's basically commie bullshite.
You're a history teacher? Great! What do you think of Howard Zinn's version of history? I hear it's all the rage in many schools.
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:38 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:Well cuz, what you'd find in that instance is one hell of a lot of 1st and 2nd generation Northern migrants in those states.
I challenge every current Republican who lives in the South to go back one generation
So challenge all you want.
Flip the parties' tax policies and affinity for or against forced dependency, and you'd flip less urban southern affiliations immediately. It has not one damn thing to do with segregation.
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:40 pm to MrCarton
quote:
Abraham Lincoln didnt fight for any of those things.
Were those big issues in Lincoln's time?
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:41 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
I know one thing. Segregationist Democrats back then are today's Republicans, and that's indisputable.
Remind me again which party wants to keep poor AA children segregated in failing schools rather than allow them to have school choice?
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:41 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:Based on the context of our discussion I REALLY didn't think I needed to specify non-migrants. No it doesn't have to do with segregation.
Well cuz, what you'd find in that instance is one hell of a lot of 1st and 2nd generation Northern migrants in those states.
So challenge all you want.
BUT southern democrats prior to 1970 happened to be FOR segregation. Those southern democrats based on EVERYTHING else would not be democrats today.
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:42 pm to Pinecone Repair
quote:You people are so blinded by my initial controversial statement (semi troll) that you fail to realize that I'm ACTUALLY on your side. I wear a Trump shirt as I type this.
Remind me again which party wants to keep poor AA children segregated in failing schools rather than allow them to have school choice?
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:42 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
A People's History of the United States? I've never had the misfortune of reading it. But I agree that it's basically commie bull shite.
Thats good to hear. Do you find the same opinion amoung other history teachers or teachers in general where you've taught?
Posted on 11/14/16 at 6:46 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
Sons teacher told him, his words not mine, "Abraham Lincoln was a Republican back then, but thats the same as today's Democrats".
That would have been pretty close to the truth until the Dems abandoned Unions and the social safety net.
The Republican party came into being during the 1850's as an "unconditional union" party. One wing was abolitionist; Lincoln was not associated with that wing.
After the war the Republicans became the Grand Old Party and home to the Robber Barons. The Democratic Party dropped its affiliation with slavery, obviously and early in the 20th century became more closely allied with the progressives. That lasted up into the 1960's and then fell apart.
There really is just a uniparty now.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News