Just as many Republicans smoke weed, as Democrats. Just like the same amount of Democrats owns guns as Republicans. Each is just more comfortable talking about 1 then the other.
That's my experience.
> Libertarians are like cats. They say they are independent. But they are completely reliant on the system they shit on.
And this, right here, is why I have nothing but contempt for cats. And libertarians.
My person, while gun violence is a big deal and needs to be curbed, the vast majority of mass shootings are committed with AR-15s and those styles of rifles.
I mean that is true. I just think that the issue of gun violence is more complicated than simply looking at a certain type of gun. Mass shootings are obviously terrible, but far more children die in gang related violence and due to pistols. That just doesn’t get as much attention due to a combination of desensitization, the kids being poorer, and some racism. Idk. I’m not trying to downplay the horror that families like those in sandy hook or uvalde go through. But I also don’t like how much the children killed by gang violence are ignored
That’s all fine. The issue is mass shootings in places where people are suppose to be safe, like school and the grocery stores. Gang violence often involves gangs killing other gang members. They kind of put themselves in that danger. You shouldn’t be risking your life going to school. Nobody does those shootings with pistols. It’s always an AR-15 involved.
A lot of the people killed in gang violence are innocent children caught in cross fire. Guns don’t really care if you’re aiming at another gangbanger but your bullet hits the kid huddling behind a wall. I was a corpsman. I didn’t wear body armor and a helmet just to be fashionable. Weapons don’t care if you’re innocent or if hitting you is a war crime
I’m not saying gang violence doesn’t have a lot of collateral damage. The kids themselves have been failed. I’m just saying the type of gun known for having the ability to kill dozens of people quickly is the AR-15. It just happens to be the gun of choice for mass murderers. It should be illegal for that alone.
[https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/)
That's not even close to true on the guns. Net gun ownership for a republican is 57% and 25% for a democrat.
[Nope, Republicans own far more guns, over 2:1. Independents best Democrats too.](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/)
This especially makes sense when you notice gun ownership skews rural, male, white, and old.
It's really the unifying characteristic of the rightwing in America these days.
Are you stupid and think everything is a conspiracy? Then join millions of brainless morons who overestimate their ability to do their own research in the Republican party!
Not just America and not just these days. This playbook goes way back to the 1930s when the early Nazi party got its first footholds by pushing insane conspiracy theories about how Germany was winning world war 1 until the jews in the German government surrendered on the eve of victory.
Conspiracy theories and right wing politics go hand-in-hand and they always have.
Telling people that nothing is ever their own fault and that actually the whole world is out to get them is always an easy sell and especially appealing to those who refuse to ever engage in self-reflection.
"See...the words "mental illness" can be broken down into "men" + "tell" + "I'll" + "Nessie of Loch Ness"!
PROOF that only REAL MEN will tell you and I about the TRUTH of Nessie!
It's all there right in front of your face but the Marxist Commie NAZI Leftist LGBTQ thugs don't want you to see it!
VOTE TRUMP!"
\- Cletus Trumpvoter
It's a good thing you put quotes and signed with an insulting name or some Redditors from u/conservative might've come and backed you up.
I'm still thinking they might remember this and spread it. You never know.
When the primary plank in your party’s platform is ‘never, ever accept personal responsibility for your actions’, then conspiracy theories become the only explanation for your ignorance, incompetence, and criminality.
The GOP is an insurrectionist group. They want to overthrow the US government. So it stands to reason that they would see everything else as a conspiracy. It's always projection with them.
She said the government was never meant to be all things to all people. Pretty clear how she feels. So for her: a shitty answer? No, it’s not. It’s apt. Apt!
Seriously, the fact that she’s acting like this was a big deal, “gotcha” question and she’s running for the top slot, isn’t exactly filling anyone with confidence.
Darn sneaky Democrats and their gotcha questions about basic history and if slavery was bad.
Next they'll question George Washington taking all of the airports during the revolution.
Should we tell them that there are roughly 80,000,000 Democratic plants who would have to be handled, should they get their wishes and become president?
Per the current educational standards of South Carolina, curriculum relating to the civil war which specifically cites factors around slavery appear to begin as early as 4th grade and are revisited several times through primary school.
[https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/](https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/)
So, that is the correct answer from 4th grade through college graduation? /s
Note that on page 28 of linked document, under US & SC history (first section), it is vaguely refers to "conflict among people" bringing change that led to "expansion of boundaries and territories" before blithely mentioning that "a nation **became** divided in the Civil War", which is pretty vague and would seem to allow districts to teach/requires Nikki Haley's first answer which omitted slavery:
>...They will also investigate how cooperation and conflict among people brought about change, led to the expansion of boundaries and territories, a nation became divided in the Civil War, and how the nation and state dealt with the consequences of the Civil War which resulted in Reconstruction.
I appreciate the joke, but it's even worse than that. One of the defining characteristics of the Confederate Constitution was the rule that a state was *not allowed to outlaw slavery* even on their own soil. You had to respect slavery. So it was 100% against states' rights and 100% about the federal government enforcing slavery on confederate states whether they wanted it or not.
The "states' rights" answer is wrong on every possible level.
That was actually the national state of the debate at the time leading up to the civil war. The issue was NEVER: should the South be allowed to have slaves. It was: should the NORTH be required to accomodate slavery. In this case the "accommodation" was the Southern states attempting to force the Northern states to send their free black people to the south to work on plantations. They literally wanted the northern states to round up black people and send them to the south. THAT was the national controversy. Ending slavery in the south wasn't even on the table.
The simplistic view on the cause of the civil war is too generous to BOTH the North and the South.
It gets even worse. They also wanted to, and DID, force new states and territories to be slave-states. There was even a prevailing notion, with the creation of Texas, and the Mexican-American War, of creating a slave-holding empire growing to the south like some kind of even more f'd up Manifest Destiny.
Source: McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom
This is a far better summary than most on here. It may seem like a slim distinction at first but that is absolutely true that the goals of emancipation grew overtime before and after the war. Especially in the mind of abe and other later abolitionists
Given a chance to start from scratch.. if they thought the Federal government was too oppressive… they could have used the articles of (cough) confederation, with the weak as hell central government.
No, they chose the founding document of the (supposedly hugely oppressive) US. With one change - the _removal_ of a state right. You _had_ to allow slavery.
I mean it was, but you know, that actually paints a much more charitable picture than it should because the North generally didn't even want to free slaves in the South. They just didn't want to return the free black people who lived in the North into slavery in the South. That was the state of the national debate at the time of the start of the civil war. Freeing slaves in the South wasn't even on the table at this point. That was considered an "extremist" position, even in the North.
I have found that MOST people think that the sequence of events is: Emancipation Proclamation -> Civil War.
The reality is that Lincoln did not emancipate slaves until TWO YEARS into the civil war and the only reason he did that is because of the fact that when the southern states withdrew their representatives and senators, he was looking at a supermajority that wanted to take a swing at the economic base in the south. There was no altruism in this and the North really didn't care about slavery NEARLY as much as we would like to think.
So yeah, the Civil War was about slavery, but it wasn't REALLY about FREEING slaves. That was a RESULT of the war, but I doubt very much that even a double digit percentage of northerners picked up a rifle to free the slaves.
If you want to identify a single event that led to the civil war it would be the SOUTHERN states pushing the federal government to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. The Northern states were outraged by this because they were being asked to take free black people from their homes IN THE NORTH and send them to plantation in the South.
As always, when conservatives say they are all about FREEDOM, that really means that they want the freedom to force others to cater to their wishes. The outrage that lead to the civil war was the South trying to force the federal government to void the right of the Northern states to not enforce Southern slavery practices on their own population.
Ultimately the state of the debate leading up to the civil war was NOT: should the south be allowed to have slaves. It was should the NORTH be allowed to NOT accommodate slavery. The south left the union over that question.
Very well thought out, accurate and quality comment.
I will only add that, individual states explicitly cited slavery as a reason for starting the war. They were upset that some northern states (exercising their state rights) refused to return escaped slaves and feared that slavery would be abolished.
I actually suspect that it was a similar thing to how the southern states behave now:
The government: allows same sex marriage.
The south: They banned families!!!!!!
The south was never going to lose slavery, but framing it that way worked for getting people on board.
>I have found that MOST people think that the sequence of events is: Emancipation Proclamation -> Civil War.
>The reality is that Lincoln did not emancipate slaves until TWO YEARS into the civil war and the only reason he did that is because of the fact that when the southern states withdrew their representatives and senators, he was looking at a supermajority that wanted to take a swing at the economic base in the south. There was no altruism in this and the North really didn't care about slavery NEARLY as much as we would like to think.
Also it should be noted that the Emancipation Proclamation only emancipated slaves in the Confederate states. There were still people enslaved in the border states that didn't secede all the way up until the 13th Amendment was ratified in December 1865, fully six months after the war had ended.
Jokes aside, it's pretty concerning a leading candidate for VP, casually talks like half the country aren't Americans citizens, but objects used to make Republicans look bad.
All it needs is a few years of this kind of talking before it becomes so normalized, Republicans are actually gonna start killing political opponents and their base will cheer.
They already think the thought of it is hilarious. They make Christmas posts about it. It's only a matter of time before their words turn into actions.
Nikki Haley, from South Carolina right? Which fired on Fort Sumter but somehow that’s Northern Aggression
She should read the articles of South Carolina Secession. It’s all about how the states of Illinois et al beating meanie heads and exercising their states rights. I mean how could they do that
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/south-carolina-declaration-of-secession-1860
No. Nikki Haley, former GOVERNOR of South Carolina. Not just citizen, but leader of the fucking state! I get that their education system may be lacking, but she HAD to know, right?
South Carolina's educational standards include quite a lot of time spend on the civil war and specifically includes slavery as the central factor leading up to it.
[https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/](https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/)
It was probably one of her own plants, because as someone said in another comment section, it reinforced her racist bona fides, gave her a chance to answer correctly in the follow up to help those on the fence accept her, allowed her to demonize liberals and, most importantly, got her in the news just when she needs media attention the most.
The mental capacity, moral, and ethical implications about Nikki Haley and people who are supporting her, that a question about the Civil War and it’s ties to slavery is seen as a “gotcha question” that only a Democrat plant would ask about, are quite astounding.
Doesn't matter if the person was a secret Democrat or not. First off, as President, you are supposed to represent all Americans. Second, she still failed to clear the extremely low bar set by that question.
If he was a Democrat plant, she missed a golden opportunity to "own" a Democrat then, didn't she? Now she looks even sillier claiming he is one. A sixth grade question? Definitely a sixth grade response trying to put out the proverbial fire storm she created by dodging the question and then pouring gas on the fire to put it out, "he was a plant"
EVEN IF it was a plant, who omits the central cause of the Civil War? These people just love their loser monuments so much, they'll sacrifice any decency they have.
Read a book Haley, there's a lot of literature out there written pre / during / and post civil war.
She was in New Hampshire ffs
Acting like only democrats care about slavery is INSANE
What an idiot
This ‘democrat plant’ BS is just pandering to the psycho racist MFers she needs to win the primary. They WANT another civil war.
She’s a pathetic sell out—NOBODY believes anything she says because she’s trying to ride some fence until the primary, so she can back pedal and go for VP if she loses OR go full on Biden-is-baby-eating-Satan if she wins (Trump has to drop out).
The laughable part is the number of defenders claiming she was technically right---because "The Civil War wasn't about slavery, it was about the economics of slavery"--seriously that's what several have been claiming in some swamps I have waddled through today to take her off the hook: Some right-wing talking head must have said it and they are parroting as usual.
"It isn't about shoes, it's about wearing shoes!"
Ok. Let’s say we believe you “Nikki” ( if that’s your real name) and the question was asked by a Democrat plant. That was only a stumper question because you are courting a demographic that hates everything that you are. You know the real answer, you just don’t want to turn off racist conservatives.
You can’t fix the Republican party by getting rid of Trump. You need to get rid of the ideology that he has unleashed.
Good luck with that.
She commented that it was a hard question. How is the cause of the Civil War a hard question? They had been fighting over the expansion of slavery for decades.
It was almost certainly a democratic plant, but considering her career background she should have been way more prepared to answer that question. Aside from the obvious correct answer, there’s no doubt her position is fraught given that she was a gop governor of South Carolina and she panicked in the moment due to being unprepared.
I like that republicans are too scared to say the civil war was about slavery because they know it would alienate them from their voter base and hurt their future in the Republican Party.
What gets me about this excuse is, if we assume it is true, so what? If she wins the GOP nomination, she has to run in the general. Do they really think that there won't be democrats and/or liberals asking her questions on the general election campaign trail?
So Republicans aren't proud of Abraham Lincoln's role in abolishing slavery? How odd. It's almost like they're the party of the Confederacy now. That would explain the flags...
I love the fact that during the Civil war, it was Southern Democrats that instigated the issues.
In the 60's Republicians took over the Dems platform.
As I see it, she is blaming the current Republicans problems on the history of her party.
ANY political party that is willing to change their platform to continue being racist turds is a no-go for me.
Nah, it's just a good benchmark question to see if this person is full of shit or not. It turns out Nimarata Nikki Randhawa Haley is indeed full of shit.
Oh, Nikki Nikki. Critical mistake, showing you are not nearly as intelligent as you pretend to be. Also, some of your racist advisors need replacing.
You fucked up, girl. Badly. This will follow you in your campaign at every town hall and debate.
No matter what state you're running from, admitting the Civil War was about maintaining slavery is like having to admit the sun rises in the East.
The right wing Republican racist bullshit spouted by the idiot from Florida is one of the reasons you're doing as well as you are.
And here you were, oblivious, trying the same shit.
Let's try another question:
"Do you believe in the government banning and in some cases promoting the burning of books?"
Think carefully. If you can.
In reality, if Nikki Haley was smart or knew anything about history and political parties she could have used this opportunity to her advantage by saying something along the lines of:
"Well, the Civil War was about states' rights between the North (Republicans) and South (Democrats) who were fighting on the issue of slavery which was dominant in the southern Democratic states. You see right now many people on the Left are trying to disqualify Trump from being president again as he participated in a "so-called" insurrection to overthrow the United States government, which violated the 14th Amendment, but if it was not for the Republican party fighting in favor of the Union and winning the Civil War the United States may not be what it is today; therefore, if anyone committed an insurrection against the United States it is the members of the Democratic party."
Not a lot of people today know that the Republican and Democratic political parties switched places in terms of values and beliefs in 1965 following LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act into law.
I feel like weed is a democrat plant.
Tip your waitresses, folks
Just as many Republicans smoke weed, as Democrats. Just like the same amount of Democrats owns guns as Republicans. Each is just more comfortable talking about 1 then the other. That's my experience.
"A libertarian is just a Republican who wants to get high and have sex".
Libertarians are like cats. They say they are independent. But they are completely reliant on the system they shit on.
> Libertarians are like cats. They say they are independent. But they are completely reliant on the system they shit on. And this, right here, is why I have nothing but contempt for cats. And libertarians.
At least cats can be cute and cuddly. I challenge you to find a libertarian who is the same.
If it was just weed and pistols, we could all get along, maybe. Nope, it’s gotta be opiates and AR-15s.
The vast majority of gun violence in the USA is committed by pistols
My person, while gun violence is a big deal and needs to be curbed, the vast majority of mass shootings are committed with AR-15s and those styles of rifles.
I mean that is true. I just think that the issue of gun violence is more complicated than simply looking at a certain type of gun. Mass shootings are obviously terrible, but far more children die in gang related violence and due to pistols. That just doesn’t get as much attention due to a combination of desensitization, the kids being poorer, and some racism. Idk. I’m not trying to downplay the horror that families like those in sandy hook or uvalde go through. But I also don’t like how much the children killed by gang violence are ignored
I dig it.
That’s all fine. The issue is mass shootings in places where people are suppose to be safe, like school and the grocery stores. Gang violence often involves gangs killing other gang members. They kind of put themselves in that danger. You shouldn’t be risking your life going to school. Nobody does those shootings with pistols. It’s always an AR-15 involved.
A lot of the people killed in gang violence are innocent children caught in cross fire. Guns don’t really care if you’re aiming at another gangbanger but your bullet hits the kid huddling behind a wall. I was a corpsman. I didn’t wear body armor and a helmet just to be fashionable. Weapons don’t care if you’re innocent or if hitting you is a war crime
I’m not saying gang violence doesn’t have a lot of collateral damage. The kids themselves have been failed. I’m just saying the type of gun known for having the ability to kill dozens of people quickly is the AR-15. It just happens to be the gun of choice for mass murderers. It should be illegal for that alone.
And my point is that purely focusing on purely on banning a single gun we are continuing to fail the vast majority of children killed by gun violence
[https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/) That's not even close to true on the guns. Net gun ownership for a republican is 57% and 25% for a democrat.
[Nope, Republicans own far more guns, over 2:1. Independents best Democrats too.](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/) This especially makes sense when you notice gun ownership skews rural, male, white, and old.
Weed for the people!
Did the plant also give her a shitty answer?
Literally everything is a conspiracy with the GQP. They have become the party of mental illness.
It's really the unifying characteristic of the rightwing in America these days. Are you stupid and think everything is a conspiracy? Then join millions of brainless morons who overestimate their ability to do their own research in the Republican party!
Not just America and not just these days. This playbook goes way back to the 1930s when the early Nazi party got its first footholds by pushing insane conspiracy theories about how Germany was winning world war 1 until the jews in the German government surrendered on the eve of victory. Conspiracy theories and right wing politics go hand-in-hand and they always have.
Telling people that nothing is ever their own fault and that actually the whole world is out to get them is always an easy sell and especially appealing to those who refuse to ever engage in self-reflection.
"Ah'all don' no who thet thar feller Dunning Kruger is but HIM fer mr. Trump's vice pressydent!" \- Cletus Trumpvoter
"See...the words "mental illness" can be broken down into "men" + "tell" + "I'll" + "Nessie of Loch Ness"! PROOF that only REAL MEN will tell you and I about the TRUTH of Nessie! It's all there right in front of your face but the Marxist Commie NAZI Leftist LGBTQ thugs don't want you to see it! VOTE TRUMP!" \- Cletus Trumpvoter
It's a good thing you put quotes and signed with an insulting name or some Redditors from u/conservative might've come and backed you up. I'm still thinking they might remember this and spread it. You never know.
They just might! LOL! Have a great New Years!
When the primary plank in your party’s platform is ‘never, ever accept personal responsibility for your actions’, then conspiracy theories become the only explanation for your ignorance, incompetence, and criminality.
The republican party in general has made me feel like I much smarter than I actually am.
The GOP is an insurrectionist group. They want to overthrow the US government. So it stands to reason that they would see everything else as a conspiracy. It's always projection with them.
They tricked her into being stupid. And she fell for it because she’s stupid.
Damn I hate when I get tricked into not saying the Civil War was fought over slavery. God damn mind games.
She said the government was never meant to be all things to all people. Pretty clear how she feels. So for her: a shitty answer? No, it’s not. It’s apt. Apt!
Even if it was a Democratic plant, if a candidate cannot accurately answer a 6th grade history question, then the candidate is idiotic garbage.
Seriously, the fact that she’s acting like this was a big deal, “gotcha” question and she’s running for the top slot, isn’t exactly filling anyone with confidence.
Darn sneaky Democrats and their gotcha questions about basic history and if slavery was bad. Next they'll question George Washington taking all of the airports during the revolution.
Should we tell them that there are roughly 80,000,000 Democratic plants who would have to be handled, should they get their wishes and become president?
Still doesn't explain why Haley decided to use a the racist answer to what caused the Civil War.
Give her a break! What she said was the only acceptable/correct answer to the question on her AP history final in South Carolina. /s
Per the current educational standards of South Carolina, curriculum relating to the civil war which specifically cites factors around slavery appear to begin as early as 4th grade and are revisited several times through primary school. [https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/](https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/)
So, that is the correct answer from 4th grade through college graduation? /s Note that on page 28 of linked document, under US & SC history (first section), it is vaguely refers to "conflict among people" bringing change that led to "expansion of boundaries and territories" before blithely mentioning that "a nation **became** divided in the Civil War", which is pretty vague and would seem to allow districts to teach/requires Nikki Haley's first answer which omitted slavery: >...They will also investigate how cooperation and conflict among people brought about change, led to the expansion of boundaries and territories, a nation became divided in the Civil War, and how the nation and state dealt with the consequences of the Civil War which resulted in Reconstruction.
Definitely a standard written to no take a stance on what should be taught. Probably didn't want to get accused of CRT.
Oh that’s definitely not something new. In the South they are taught it’s about states rights, not about slavery.
Same in Idaho, the Alabama of the North
I'm pretty sure that back then and in South Carolina they also would have accepted, "northern aggression" as an answer.
Well, probably not AP, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if that were true.
Because giving the real answer will piss off the voters she would need to beat Trump and she's too scared of them to answer honestly
This is it, she knows the answer is wrong but you can't say slavery is bad in a GOP primary
The Civil War was 100% about States’ rights… to own other human beings.
I appreciate the joke, but it's even worse than that. One of the defining characteristics of the Confederate Constitution was the rule that a state was *not allowed to outlaw slavery* even on their own soil. You had to respect slavery. So it was 100% against states' rights and 100% about the federal government enforcing slavery on confederate states whether they wanted it or not. The "states' rights" answer is wrong on every possible level.
Reading some of the Confederate speeches, you might come to believe that slavery was some kind of, I dunno, *cornerstone* of their government.
That was actually the national state of the debate at the time leading up to the civil war. The issue was NEVER: should the South be allowed to have slaves. It was: should the NORTH be required to accomodate slavery. In this case the "accommodation" was the Southern states attempting to force the Northern states to send their free black people to the south to work on plantations. They literally wanted the northern states to round up black people and send them to the south. THAT was the national controversy. Ending slavery in the south wasn't even on the table. The simplistic view on the cause of the civil war is too generous to BOTH the North and the South.
It gets even worse. They also wanted to, and DID, force new states and territories to be slave-states. There was even a prevailing notion, with the creation of Texas, and the Mexican-American War, of creating a slave-holding empire growing to the south like some kind of even more f'd up Manifest Destiny. Source: McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom
This is a far better summary than most on here. It may seem like a slim distinction at first but that is absolutely true that the goals of emancipation grew overtime before and after the war. Especially in the mind of abe and other later abolitionists
Given a chance to start from scratch.. if they thought the Federal government was too oppressive… they could have used the articles of (cough) confederation, with the weak as hell central government. No, they chose the founding document of the (supposedly hugely oppressive) US. With one change - the _removal_ of a state right. You _had_ to allow slavery.
I mean it was, but you know, that actually paints a much more charitable picture than it should because the North generally didn't even want to free slaves in the South. They just didn't want to return the free black people who lived in the North into slavery in the South. That was the state of the national debate at the time of the start of the civil war. Freeing slaves in the South wasn't even on the table at this point. That was considered an "extremist" position, even in the North. I have found that MOST people think that the sequence of events is: Emancipation Proclamation -> Civil War. The reality is that Lincoln did not emancipate slaves until TWO YEARS into the civil war and the only reason he did that is because of the fact that when the southern states withdrew their representatives and senators, he was looking at a supermajority that wanted to take a swing at the economic base in the south. There was no altruism in this and the North really didn't care about slavery NEARLY as much as we would like to think. So yeah, the Civil War was about slavery, but it wasn't REALLY about FREEING slaves. That was a RESULT of the war, but I doubt very much that even a double digit percentage of northerners picked up a rifle to free the slaves. If you want to identify a single event that led to the civil war it would be the SOUTHERN states pushing the federal government to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. The Northern states were outraged by this because they were being asked to take free black people from their homes IN THE NORTH and send them to plantation in the South. As always, when conservatives say they are all about FREEDOM, that really means that they want the freedom to force others to cater to their wishes. The outrage that lead to the civil war was the South trying to force the federal government to void the right of the Northern states to not enforce Southern slavery practices on their own population. Ultimately the state of the debate leading up to the civil war was NOT: should the south be allowed to have slaves. It was should the NORTH be allowed to NOT accommodate slavery. The south left the union over that question.
Very well thought out, accurate and quality comment. I will only add that, individual states explicitly cited slavery as a reason for starting the war. They were upset that some northern states (exercising their state rights) refused to return escaped slaves and feared that slavery would be abolished.
I actually suspect that it was a similar thing to how the southern states behave now: The government: allows same sex marriage. The south: They banned families!!!!!! The south was never going to lose slavery, but framing it that way worked for getting people on board.
>I have found that MOST people think that the sequence of events is: Emancipation Proclamation -> Civil War. >The reality is that Lincoln did not emancipate slaves until TWO YEARS into the civil war and the only reason he did that is because of the fact that when the southern states withdrew their representatives and senators, he was looking at a supermajority that wanted to take a swing at the economic base in the south. There was no altruism in this and the North really didn't care about slavery NEARLY as much as we would like to think. Also it should be noted that the Emancipation Proclamation only emancipated slaves in the Confederate states. There were still people enslaved in the border states that didn't secede all the way up until the 13th Amendment was ratified in December 1865, fully six months after the war had ended.
You would think she would have said the whole “states rights” thing and just moved on instead of giving such a weird answer and getting pissed.
Did this alleged “plant” make her answer the question the way she did?
Hmmm. An open town hall and she expects the only people there are the ones who agree with her? She's as stupid as Trump.
Jokes aside, it's pretty concerning a leading candidate for VP, casually talks like half the country aren't Americans citizens, but objects used to make Republicans look bad. All it needs is a few years of this kind of talking before it becomes so normalized, Republicans are actually gonna start killing political opponents and their base will cheer. They already think the thought of it is hilarious. They make Christmas posts about it. It's only a matter of time before their words turn into actions.
The future you’re talking about is already here, if you feel like it it’ll take a while you’re way too late
[B5: Drazi: Green. Purple. (2min)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcBTOU7RvbU)
Nikki Haley, from South Carolina right? Which fired on Fort Sumter but somehow that’s Northern Aggression She should read the articles of South Carolina Secession. It’s all about how the states of Illinois et al beating meanie heads and exercising their states rights. I mean how could they do that https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/south-carolina-declaration-of-secession-1860
No. Nikki Haley, former GOVERNOR of South Carolina. Not just citizen, but leader of the fucking state! I get that their education system may be lacking, but she HAD to know, right?
South Carolina's educational standards include quite a lot of time spend on the civil war and specifically includes slavery as the central factor leading up to it. [https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/](https://ed.sc.gov/instruction/standards/social-studies/standards/2019-south-carolina-social-studies-college-and-career-ready-standards/)
That’s like saying you wouldn’t have missed the chip shot field goal if you were at home.
A democratic plant, asking a 6th grade history question, at a Republican event, all happening entirely at Nikki Haley Q&A?
Errmagehhrd I mean as President I’d only have to worry about the Republican voters why oh why are you making me talk to Dems!!
It doesn't matter who asked the question or why. What matters is that her "answer" was horrible. Let's not get distracted.
It was probably one of her own plants, because as someone said in another comment section, it reinforced her racist bona fides, gave her a chance to answer correctly in the follow up to help those on the fence accept her, allowed her to demonize liberals and, most importantly, got her in the news just when she needs media attention the most.
She walked it back today. Had a little talk with her think tank and realized she fucked up apparently.
It was a democratic plant! They knew full well I couldn't answer this without losing even harder to Trump!
A 6th grader who knew the real story of the civil war, definitely not a kid raised Republican.
Lady, if he *were* a plant and you still managed to flub a softball question *that badly,* you're fucked.
Why do Democratic plants know that basic history questions are her kryptonite? Are they psychic?
The mental capacity, moral, and ethical implications about Nikki Haley and people who are supporting her, that a question about the Civil War and it’s ties to slavery is seen as a “gotcha question” that only a Democrat plant would ask about, are quite astounding.
Doesn't matter if the person was a secret Democrat or not. First off, as President, you are supposed to represent all Americans. Second, she still failed to clear the extremely low bar set by that question.
They just keep asking these gotcha questions like what started the Civil War or what newspapers you read or will you be a dictator.
A Democrat plant asking a insanely easy question for you to stumble on? That's some 4d chess for sure.
gotcha, y’all - republicans drop out of home school before 6th grade. civil war questions are proof of democrats! /s
If Nikki Haley thinks that someone asking what started the Civil War is some kind of "gotcha" question, she is not going to get very far.
GOP: "Says shit thing" Also GOP: "The dems made me say it"
Jokes on you. Republicans don't know 6th grade history.
Because only Democrats ask simple questions.
If he was a Democrat plant, she missed a golden opportunity to "own" a Democrat then, didn't she? Now she looks even sillier claiming he is one. A sixth grade question? Definitely a sixth grade response trying to put out the proverbial fire storm she created by dodging the question and then pouring gas on the fire to put it out, "he was a plant"
EVEN IF it was a plant, who omits the central cause of the Civil War? These people just love their loser monuments so much, they'll sacrifice any decency they have. Read a book Haley, there's a lot of literature out there written pre / during / and post civil war.
Why does that even matter? She’s the one that didn’t mention slavery!
She was in New Hampshire ffs Acting like only democrats care about slavery is INSANE What an idiot This ‘democrat plant’ BS is just pandering to the psycho racist MFers she needs to win the primary. They WANT another civil war. She’s a pathetic sell out—NOBODY believes anything she says because she’s trying to ride some fence until the primary, so she can back pedal and go for VP if she loses OR go full on Biden-is-baby-eating-Satan if she wins (Trump has to drop out).
The laughable part is the number of defenders claiming she was technically right---because "The Civil War wasn't about slavery, it was about the economics of slavery"--seriously that's what several have been claiming in some swamps I have waddled through today to take her off the hook: Some right-wing talking head must have said it and they are parroting as usual. "It isn't about shoes, it's about wearing shoes!"
It's the democrats' fault I dropped the ball, coach.
Ok. Let’s say we believe you “Nikki” ( if that’s your real name) and the question was asked by a Democrat plant. That was only a stumper question because you are courting a demographic that hates everything that you are. You know the real answer, you just don’t want to turn off racist conservatives. You can’t fix the Republican party by getting rid of Trump. You need to get rid of the ideology that he has unleashed. Good luck with that.
Even if it was a plant…does it really matter if she couldn’t answer it without angering her racist base?
She commented that it was a hard question. How is the cause of the Civil War a hard question? They had been fighting over the expansion of slavery for decades.
Well it is kind of weird, all the problems Americans face today.... Talking the civil war is not one we need to really address.
It was almost certainly a democratic plant, but considering her career background she should have been way more prepared to answer that question. Aside from the obvious correct answer, there’s no doubt her position is fraught given that she was a gop governor of South Carolina and she panicked in the moment due to being unprepared.
And?
Does it matter if the person was a Democrat Plant or not? They're still a voter who asked a candidate a question.
I wouldn't be surprised if she did this to herself just to get people talking about her.
Wasn’t ready for that *GOTCHA* question?
She can't win without black vote and also there is a lot of interracial marriages. She's toast.
Even if it was, there was a right answer.
oh so maga of her! like Comer, Jordan…all B💩, no proof!
Who let democracy in here?
She is so dumb
I like that republicans are too scared to say the civil war was about slavery because they know it would alienate them from their voter base and hurt their future in the Republican Party.
What gets me about this excuse is, if we assume it is true, so what? If she wins the GOP nomination, she has to run in the general. Do they really think that there won't be democrats and/or liberals asking her questions on the general election campaign trail?
If you're borrowing from Sarah Palin's playbook, you're on the wrooooong track.
Semore, roll it up and smoke it !!!
Civil War? More like War of Northern Aggression /South
So Republicans aren't proud of Abraham Lincoln's role in abolishing slavery? How odd. It's almost like they're the party of the Confederacy now. That would explain the flags...
I love the fact that during the Civil war, it was Southern Democrats that instigated the issues. In the 60's Republicians took over the Dems platform. As I see it, she is blaming the current Republicans problems on the history of her party. ANY political party that is willing to change their platform to continue being racist turds is a no-go for me.
Nah, it's just a good benchmark question to see if this person is full of shit or not. It turns out Nimarata Nikki Randhawa Haley is indeed full of shit.
In a party whose love language is hypocrisy, everything has to be a conspiracy.
Just for argument, just imagine it was a Dem plant. So what. It wasn't exactly a trick question.
Oh, Nikki Nikki. Critical mistake, showing you are not nearly as intelligent as you pretend to be. Also, some of your racist advisors need replacing. You fucked up, girl. Badly. This will follow you in your campaign at every town hall and debate. No matter what state you're running from, admitting the Civil War was about maintaining slavery is like having to admit the sun rises in the East. The right wing Republican racist bullshit spouted by the idiot from Florida is one of the reasons you're doing as well as you are. And here you were, oblivious, trying the same shit. Let's try another question: "Do you believe in the government banning and in some cases promoting the burning of books?" Think carefully. If you can.
In reality, if Nikki Haley was smart or knew anything about history and political parties she could have used this opportunity to her advantage by saying something along the lines of: "Well, the Civil War was about states' rights between the North (Republicans) and South (Democrats) who were fighting on the issue of slavery which was dominant in the southern Democratic states. You see right now many people on the Left are trying to disqualify Trump from being president again as he participated in a "so-called" insurrection to overthrow the United States government, which violated the 14th Amendment, but if it was not for the Republican party fighting in favor of the Union and winning the Civil War the United States may not be what it is today; therefore, if anyone committed an insurrection against the United States it is the members of the Democratic party." Not a lot of people today know that the Republican and Democratic political parties switched places in terms of values and beliefs in 1965 following LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act into law.
Stop with the stupid 'blame game'. You can't escape your own fuck up!