(12-20-2023 05:22 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Did you know this isn’t the first time Democrats have removed a candidate from the ballot that they didn’t like?
It’s true, only with President Abraham Lincoln it was TEN states:
Hey, maybe it will be 10 with Trump too when all is said and done, there’s still a lot of time to go!
Heck, maybe Trump will get to “17” — wouldn’t that be poetic?
Here are the TEN STATES that turned on Lincoln:
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana
Just like Colorado now, the Democrats, who were mainly slave owners, barred Republican presidential candidate Abraham Lincoln from appearing on the ballots in 10 Southern states during the 1860 presidential election. But Abraham Lincoln was elected as the 16th President of the United States, becoming the first Republican president in American history.
NOTE: These states were South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Virginia.
NOTE: Lincoln did not appear on the ballots in those Southern states because they did not support his candidacy due to his anti-slavery stance. The Democrats wanted to keep slavery forever.
NOTE: Those slave states chose to support other candidates or not include his name on their ballots. However, despite not being on the ballots in those states, he won the election with a majority of electoral votes from the states where he was on the ballot.
MY TAKE: It’s ironic that the Republicans now are described as the racists, people who hate black people when actually, they brought slavery to an end, and the Democrats wanted to keep black people enslaved, even going to war to secede. May God help us not repeat history.
Here are even more details:
![[Image: Screen-Shot-2023-12-20-at-10.37.25-AM.png]](https://wltreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Screen-Shot-2023-12-20-at-10.37.25-AM.png)
Yes, Abraham Lincoln was once taken off the ballot in an election. This occurred during the presidential election of 1860, when the United States was deeply divided over the issue of slavery and its expansion into the western territories.
In that election, the Democratic Party split into two factions due to disagreements over slavery. The Northern Democrats nominated Stephen Douglas, while the Southern Democrats nominated John Breckinridge. Meanwhile, the newly formed Republican Party, which opposed the expansion of slavery, nominated Abraham Lincoln as their candidate.
In the Southern states, where slavery was widely supported, Lincoln’s name was deliberately excluded from the ballot. This was done by the Southern Democratic Party as a protest against Lincoln’s anti-slavery stance. As a result, Lincoln was not an option for voters in ten Southern states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.
Despite being left off the ballot in these states, Lincoln went on to win the election, securing a majority of the electoral votes from the Northern states. However, his victory further polarized the nation, and within a few months of his election, seven Southern states seceded from the Union, forming the Confederate States of America. This ultimately led to the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861.
In summary, Abraham Lincoln was indeed taken off the ballot in an election, specifically the presidential election of 1860 in the Southern states that supported slavery. This event was a significant factor in the growing tensions between the North and the South, which eventually led to the Civil War.
Link
Please, for the love of God, stop comparing Trump to Lincolin. Unlike Trump, Lincolin suspended habeus corpus, had his people cut telegraph wires and arrest people on the Union side who were critical of him. Not to mention that Lincolin was not in favor of freeing the slaves, until he was pressured to sign the 13th amendment, and that the Union was actually fighting to establish an unconstitutional central government, which they got once the Confederacy lost the war. Trump is too foolish to come close to holding a candle to the dictatorial tendencies that Lincolin had. Why do you think Lincolin is Obama's favorite president?
the comparative is fk'n tard ... just fk!
(12-20-2023 06:10 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]the comparative is fk'n tard ... just fk!
You think the left is brain dead. The right is much worse.
(12-20-2023 06:35 PM)andybible1995 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:10 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]the comparative is fk'n tard ... just fk!
You think the left is brain dead. The right is much worse.
they have zero clue how to combat this ... or do they ... yeah, don't kid yourself, bubby ... the uniparty is the real fk'n deal...
and the cons that pretend to write about such ... well, they're nowhere close to being as mean as they need to be...
(12-20-2023 07:05 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:35 PM)andybible1995 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:10 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]the comparative is fk'n tard ... just fk!
You think the left is brain dead. The right is much worse.
they have zero clue how to combat this ... or do they ... yeah, don't kid yourself, bubby ... the uniparty is the real fk'n deal...
and the cons that write about such ... well, there not close to as mean as they need to be...
also, why is Ronna still in the RNC leadershite position ... this shite really isn't that difficult to figgle out...
More of Crimson's BS sources. Trump's exclusion is unique and unprecedented.
Note that Virginia, where Lincoln could be voted for, got no votes in 121 of VA's 145 counties and 10 or less in 9 more. He had only 1,929 votes, almost all of which were in the future state of West Virginia.
Wiki, not a great source, but it is a lot more logical and reliable than this ignorant history of the link in the OP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1860_Unite...l_election
"...One key difference between modern elections and those of the mid-nineteenth century is that at the time the state did not print and distribute ballots. In theory, any document containing a valid or at least non-excessive number names of citizens of a particular state (provided they were eligible to vote in the electoral college within that state) might have been accepted as a valid presidential ballot; however, what this meant in practice was that a candidate's campaign was responsible for printing and distributing their own ballots (this service was typically done by supportive newspaper publishers). Moreover, since voters did not choose the president directly, but rather presidential electors, the only way for a voter to meaningfully support a particular candidate for president was cast a ballot for citizens of his state who would have pledged to vote for the candidate in the Electoral College. In ten southern slave states, no citizen would publicly pledge to vote for Abraham Lincoln, so citizens there had no legal means to vote for the Republican nominee. In most of Virginia, no publisher would print ballots for Lincoln's pledged electors.[28] While a citizen without access to a ballot for Lincoln could theoretically have still voted for him by means of a write-in ballot provided his state had electors pledged to Lincoln and the voter knew their identities, casting a ballot in favor of the Republican candidate in a strongly pro-slavery county would have incurred (at minimum) social ostracization (of course, casting a vote for Breckinridge in a strongly abolitionist county ran a voter the same risk).[..."
(12-20-2023 07:09 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 07:05 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:35 PM)andybible1995 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:10 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]the comparative is fk'n tard ... just fk!
You think the left is brain dead. The right is much worse.
they have zero clue how to combat this ... or do they ... yeah, don't kid yourself, bubby ... the uniparty is the real fk'n deal...
and the cons that write about such ... well, there not close to as mean as they need to be...
also, why is Ronna still in the RNC leadershite position ... this shite really isn't that difficult to figgle out...
Different breeds but all hogs at the same trough
Its hard to believe southern slave owners, our ancestors, were once liberal democrats.
(12-20-2023 09:45 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: [ -> ]Believe it
which explains why these liberal democrats want to now remove the confederate war memorial in the Arlington National Cemetery; yet its Lincoln loving abolitionists coming to protest their removal.
(12-20-2023 09:15 PM)shere khan Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 07:09 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 07:05 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:35 PM)andybible1995 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:10 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ]the comparative is fk'n tard ... just fk!
You think the left is brain dead. The right is much worse.
they have zero clue how to combat this ... or do they ... yeah, don't kid yourself, bubby ... the uniparty is the real fk'n deal...
and the cons that write about such ... well, there not close to as mean as they need to be...
also, why is Ronna still in the RNC leadershite position ... this shite really isn't that difficult to figgle out...
Different breeds but all hogs at the same trough
absolutely ... it's pretentious showmanship at best...
I still contend if you don't pay 'em like a like a top tier foosball corch with strict oversight and the elimation of PACs AND super PACs coupled with equitable campaign fund distribution, congress will only attract minds from the dregs that suit the needs to win any version of a student council election...
in today's version, congress is nothing but a caco'phony' of globo-homo corpshite controlled 'murican schmucks ... the dems don't care whom and too many pubs just reel in the next one willing to suck on the nipple for a quickie...
(12-20-2023 10:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 09:15 PM)shere khan Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 07:09 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 07:05 PM)stinkfist Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 06:35 PM)andybible1995 Wrote: [ -> ]You think the left is brain dead. The right is much worse.
they have zero clue how to combat this ... or do they ... yeah, don't kid yourself, bubby ... the uniparty is the real fk'n deal...
and the cons that write about such ... well, there not close to as mean as they need to be...
also, why is Ronna still in the RNC leadershite position ... this shite really isn't that difficult to figgle out...
Different breeds but all hogs at the same trough
absolutely ... it's pretentious showmanship at best...
I still contend if you don't pay 'em like a like a top tier foosball corch with strict oversight and the elimation of PACs AND super PACs coupled with equitable campaign fund distribution, congress will only attract minds from the dregs that suit the needs to win any version of a student council election...
in today's version, congress is nothing but a caco'phony' of globo-homo corpshite controlled 'murican schmucks ... the dems don't care whom and too many pubs just reel in the next one willing to suck on the nipple for a quickie...
Failing to do the first part of your statement, even the ones that go to the Hill with a clean record and stars in their eyes will be seduced by the power. Once they have the power they will go to whoever will fund their reelection to that power.
My gosh Mensa is a dumb***
yep, that's why I want to thank you all for NOT quoting him (so far). I've got him on ignore and don't have to read his false & inane drivel.
Now, if everyone would stop quoting the Fed and the other two main 'tards....
It is right because they say it is right. Orwell would love our local Gin and perhaps client abuser.
The north was just as racist, Marc, as was CA, WA, etc. That was the point of the 2020 riots: the whole country is guilty. It wasn't just a Southern thing like you believe.
(12-20-2023 11:39 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: [ -> ]My gosh Mensa is a dumb***
What’s dumb is pretending today’s political parties bear any resemblance to the platforms from 150 years ago…
Southern conservatives were once democrats; then the 1960’s happened & the Democratic party embraced Civil Rights reforms & the Republican party took them in with a very familiar “state’s rights” theme.
(12-21-2023 08:55 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote: [ -> ] (12-20-2023 11:39 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: [ -> ]My gosh Mensa is a dumb***
What’s dumb is pretending today’s political parties bear any resemblance to the platforms from 150 years ago…
Southern conservatives were once democrats; then the 1960’s happened & the Democratic party embraced Civil Rights reforms & the Republican party took them in with a very familiar “state’s rights” theme.
My question for them is who do they think actually falls for their nonsense? Do they actually think they can both pretend to be on the right side of slavery while waving the confederate flag?
There is just no end to the similarities between our greatest presidents, trump and Lincoln.
