Presidential March Madness Round 4

[vcczar]

@Arkansas Progressive @A man from Colorado @Alexander-Nicholas @Beetlejuice @bradleyg223 @Bushwa777 @Cal @Cenzonico @ConservativeElector2 @DakotaHale @DJBillyShakes @Dobs @ebrk85 @Edouard @Entrecampos @Eugene @Fbarbarossa @Hestia @HiyarAgasi @jnewt @Joe303300 @jvikings1 @Kitten @Largo833 @Lars @lm1145 @Magnus Rex @Mark_W @matthewyoung123 @Melted-Pyrite @MrPotatoTed @Murrman104 @NCblue1 @OrangeP47 @Pringles @pilight @pman @Rezi @Rodja @Sean F Kennedy @ShortKing @SilentLiberty @The Blood @themiddlepolitical @Timur @Umbrella @vcczar @Vicx @Vols21 @Willthescout7 @Wiw @WVProgressive @Zenobiyl

Note: For this round, the best performing loser will go to the next round. 

[vcczar]

I actually think Lincoln was a better president than LBJ. Just trying to get him into the next round. 

[Bushwa777]

This was tough all are faves 

[Mothwoman]

The second question was tough, both were awful Presidents, but I voted Johnson because I support the Vietnam war in general, though a more aggressive President (like Barry Goldwater would have been) would have ended the war successfully before fifth columnist hippies were able to erode American willpower, and force us to leave South Vietnam to the communists.

[Murrman104]

4 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

The second question was tough, both were awful Presidents, but I voted Johnson because I support the Vietnam war in general, though a more aggressive President (like Barry Goldwater would have been) would have ended the war successfully before fifth columnist hippies were able to erode American willpower, and force us to leave South Vietnam to the communists.

 

 

Edited March 17, 2023 by Murrman104

[themiddlepolitical]

3 hours ago, Murrman104 said:

 

 

Yeah my jaw dropped, I had to re read it 3 times.

[Cenzonico]

LBJ getting this far is a crime against humanity. 

[mark2]

3 hours ago, Mothwoman said:

The second question was tough, both were awful Presidents, but I voted Johnson because I support the Vietnam war in general, though a more aggressive President (like Barry Goldwater would have been) would have ended the war successfully before fifth columnist hippies were able to erode American willpower, and force us to leave South Vietnam to the communists.

[Mothwoman]

38 minutes ago, themiddlepolitical said:

Yeah my jaw dropped, I had to re read it 3 times.

Why? Both Johnson, and Lincoln did more to destroy traditional values, tear up the constitution, and expand the federal government than any other President.

Johnson’s Great Society ruined the federal budget by giving billions of tax dollars to lazy bums, young bucks, and welfare queens. His civil rights program trampled both states rights, and the rights of private citizens. During his term the Warren court kicked their leftist judicial activism into high gear, though we can’t blame him entirely as many of the appoints were made by his predecessors, though he did appoint the grossly unqualified Thurgood Marshal to the bench, passing over many good candidates in the process (wonder why?). His signing of the 1965 naturalization act is why America is no longer recognizable in many parts of the country. His one saving grace was that he was his foreign policy which was fervently anti communist.

Now let’s get to Lincoln, the man who did more to rip up the constitution, and divide the country than anyone. When the southern states decides that they did not wish to be ruled by a proto-socialist tyrant in waiting who opposed everything their culture cherished, he wasted no time in establishing himself as a tyrant. Lincoln used the military to harass, and shut up everyone who opposed him, suspended habeas corpus, confiscated private property, took the nation off the gold standard, and left the tenth amendment to die by passing bills, and amendments that allowed the federal government trample the rights of states. What was the benefit of all this warlord like control? Take a look at New York City, Chicago, and Detroit if you want an answer.

[The Blood]

8 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

everything their culture cherished

What Southern culture cherished:

[Bushwa777]

I see the argument starts again.   

[Pringles]

31 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

Why? Both Johnson, and Lincoln did more to destroy traditional values, tear up the constitution, and expand the federal government than any other President.

Johnson’s Great Society ruined the federal budget by giving billions of tax dollars to lazy bums, young bucks, and welfare queens. His civil rights program trampled both states rights, and the rights of private citizens. During his term the Warren court kicked their leftist judicial activism into high gear, though we can’t blame him entirely as many of the appoints were made by his predecessors, though he did appoint the grossly unqualified Thurgood Marshal to the bench, passing over many good candidates in the process (wonder why?). His signing of the 1965 naturalization act is why America is no longer recognizable in many parts of the country. His one saving grace was that he was his foreign policy which was fervently anti communist.

Now let’s get to Lincoln, the man who did more to rip up the constitution, and divide the country than anyone. When the southern states decides that they did not wish to be ruled by a proto-socialist tyrant in waiting who opposed everything their culture cherished, he wasted no time in establishing himself as a tyrant. Lincoln used the military to harass, and shut up everyone who opposed him, suspended habeas corpus, confiscated private property, took the nation off the gold standard, and left the tenth amendment to die by passing bills, and amendments that allowed the federal government trample the rights of states. What was the benefit of all this warlord like control? Take a look at New York City, Chicago, and Detroit if you want an answer.

Damn. Just DAYUMMN

[Pringles]

Washington vs FDR is pretty tough for me. Like, both are good Presidents but I have a lot of issues with both… ultimately selected FDR cause I despise closet Federalists but I could go either way truthfully. FDR is more of a big government dude than Washington ever was, the rest are choices I don’t even need to think about lol. 

[Mothwoman]

28 minutes ago, The Blood said:

What Southern culture cherished:

The civil war wasn’t about slavery. Lincoln did not support abolition until such a time came when it was politically opportune to do so. The south seceded in opposition to an economic system which vastly favored northern industrialists at the expense of southern farmers. Lincoln supported that economic system, and the south decided that they had had enough of being treated like second class citizens.

[Imperator Taco Cat]

40 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

Now let’s get to Lincoln, Lincoln used the military to harass, and shut up everyone who opposed him, suspended habeas corpus, confiscated private property, took the nation off the gold standard, and left the tenth amendment to die by passing bills, and amendments that allowed the federal government trample the rights of states. What was the benefit of all this warlord like control? Take a look at New York City, Chicago, and Detroit if you want an answer.

Didn't you call nixon one of the best presidents yesterday? He also ended the gold standard.

[Pringles]

2 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

The civil war wasn’t about slavery. Lincoln did not support abolition until such a time came when it was politically opportune to do so. The south seceded in opposition to an economic system which vastly favored northern industrialists at the expense of southern farmers. Lincoln supported that economic system, and the south decided that they had had enough of being treated like second class citizens.

Do tell, the distinctions between the North and South’s economic system. 

[Euri]

Is this going to happen for every poll?

[Imperator Taco Cat]

9 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

The civil war wasn’t about slavery. Lincoln did not support abolition until such a time came when it was politically opportune to do so. The south seceded in opposition to an economic system which vastly favored northern industrialists at the expense of southern farmers. Lincoln supported that economic system, and the south decided that they had had enough of being treated like second class citizens.

Quote

            [A]n increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. . . .

            For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.  . . .

            On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States. The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy. . . .

-South Carolina Declaration of Secession.

[The Blood]

5 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

The civil war wasn’t about slavery. Lincoln did not support abolition until such a time came when it was politically opportune to do so. The south seceded in opposition to an economic system which vastly favored northern industrialists at the expense of southern farmers. Lincoln supported that economic system, and the south decided that they had had enough of being treated like second class citizens.

Okay, you never learned a thing past your grade school social studies class in 1960s West Virginia which forced the lost cause myth down kids' throats. Still doesn't excuse supporting a rebellion which literally enshrined slavery in its constitution, so, uh, fuck off and take a listen, I guess.

 

[Cenzonico]

17 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

The civil war wasn’t about slavery.

 

[Mothwoman]

14 minutes ago, Imperator Taco Cat said:

Didn't you call nixon one of the best presidents yesterday? He also ended the gold standard.

No one’s perfect. Trump is the best President of my lifetime, but he still signed that awful crime bill.

12 minutes ago, Pringles said:

Do tell, the distinctions between the North and South’s economic system. 

The north was controlled by large industrialists, and financiers, while the south was an agrarian society made up of yeoman farmers, and a few large cash crop plantations.

[mark2]

35 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

The civil war wasn’t about slavery. Lincoln did not support abolition until such a time came when it was politically opportune to do so. The south seceded in opposition to an economic system which vastly favored northern industrialists at the expense of southern farmers. Lincoln supported that economic system, and the south decided that they had had enough of being treated like second class citizens.

Featured in this picture is a pie chart created by John Pierce (debated) of 4 southern states reasons for secession within their own declarations, based on how many words of the declaration were dedicated to the issues. "Context" is procedural language and/or historical explanation that isn't devoted particularly to one topic.
As seen in the chart, Georgia is the only state to go into detail about economic issues (Mississippi also went into detail about economic issues, but they were in correlation with slavery's impact on their economy, so it went into the slavery category.)
I can go into more detail about this, if you would like.

Edited March 17, 2023 by mark2

[Imperator Taco Cat]

33 minutes ago, Pringles said:

Do tell, the distinctions between the North and South’s economic system. 

Farming (with lots of slavery) vs industry (now with wage slavery)

[vcczar]

Mothwoman's knowledge on history is so superficial and tilted that it's embarrasing to read. 

Let's try not to get this thread shut down guys. 

[Imperator Taco Cat]

18 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

No one’s perfect.

Fair enough.

19 minutes ago, Mothwoman said:

The north was controlled by large industrialists, and financiers, while the south was an agrarian society made up of yeoman farmers, and a few large cash crop plantations.

Although the majority of farms didn't have slaves the majority of wealth was from slaves.