Posted on 11/03/2004 8:24:39 AM PST by Always Right
My history books said the south lost the Civil War, but apparently that was just a battle. The south lost the battle of 1861-1865, but now are winning the war.
Excuse the map, I could not find one that had all the states colored in.
ping
Why should anyone be embarassed about your non-existant mythical third party? Or anyone but you, it's lone voter, that is.
That's a nice little story, but silver production in Nevada began in 1859 well before the war and Nevada's territorial government was organized as a procedural matter in the "secession winter" session of congress, also before the war. Nevada's state archivist Guy Rocha calls the claim that Nevada was admitted to finance the war "a wonderful tale, but nothing could be farther from the truth" given that the mining had been underway for several years. The real reason for its admittance, which came in late October 1864 (i.e. onyl a few months before the end of the war) was the fact that Lincoln wanted its electoral votes in his 1864 campaign and needed to bolster the moderate ranks in the Republican Congress, which was trending radical.
Confederate tripe.
The constitution is quite clear that no state may be split without the sanction of its legislature. Unless you can show me where the Virginia legislature gave that sanction, the split was illegal. It happened to be sure. But it was still illegal.
Reconstructed Virginia lost all of the court cases it made to recover West Virginia.
Incorrect. If memory serves me well, they sued to recover some of the counties that had been arbitrarily claimed by Wheeling and succeeded in doing so. They were content to let Wheeling go however due to years of differences.
The loyal citizens of western Virginia organized a Unionist government in the absense of any constitutional government within the boundaries of the state.
Bullsh*t. They set up a rump government in Wheeling, purported themselves to rule over about 30 counties to their south that wanted nothing to do with them, and voted for separate statehood with a Saddam Hussein-style "election."
The Cherokees, in particular, wised up by 1863 and pretty much repudiated any agreements they had with the south.
Last time I checked, Chief Stand Watie and the Cherokees he led were among the very last confederate troops to surrender in 1865.
So...you're a Democrat?
But the Party of Lincoln went back to the White House.
All I asked for was that the state fall clearly on the union side. Sure, this excludes states where loyalties were strongly divided no matter how much the Lincoln government pretended to legislate over them. But that's because the fact of that division itself means that they were not clear-cut unionist states! You can pretend that your side in Missouri was the better government than the elected confederate one but that will never change the fact that Missouri was a divided state.
When it comes to clear cut union states, there are only four that voted for Bush. What's so difficult to understand about that, capitan?
That's odd. I saw a Democrat on my ballot, a Republican on my ballot, and a Libertarian on my ballot. All three parties were identified by those names. There wasn't anything called the "Party of Lincoln" though.
Notice that there are three types of states on the map:
The seceded states (both before and after sumter)
The border states
The union states
Out of all the union states, there are only four that voted for Bush: Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, and Kansas.
Do you comprehend now or are you going to respond with more word games and obfuscation?
And they're forever speaking at Lincoln Day celebrations, and at the Lincoln Memorial. Like it or not, the GOP goes out of it's way to tie itself with Abraham Lincoln.
In closing, I want to leave you with this quote from Mrs. Bush at the RNC.
"No American President ever wants to go to war. Abraham Lincoln didn't want to go to war, but he knew saving the union required it. Franklin Roosevelt didn't want to go to war - but he knew defeating tyranny demanded it. And my husband didn't want to go to war, but he knew the safety and security of America and the world depended on it."
She knows the truth about Abraham Lincoln. I suppose y'all are going to make it a point to take care of that, what with all y'all in charge of the Republican Party 'n all.
Bush's raw margin in Texas and Georgia (2.24 million votes) was larger than Kerry's margin in New York and California (2.20 million).
Resistance was futile.
For once Iowa gets to be red, and they blow it on the map???
Man... dissapointment again. At least this time we ended up in the (R) column.
Watch it there, bub. Iowa has largely the same problem that Ohio (and Kentucky, for that matter) has. The state political machines are largely run by organized labor, and goes Dem in spite of being social conservatives.
It's unfortunate, but it's changing as the Dems move away from middle-America's values to embrace the militant homosexuals and the fringe whackos. In 2000, we were close. In 2004, Bush won. Things are looking brighter all the time.
It just looks like the South rose again. If you look at the map with counties you'll see that it's Urban against Rural/Suburban.
It was nice of the South to Vote for the President,though. : D
As an unfortunate resident of a "Blue" state, I am so happy we have the Southern states to thank for our momentous victory but your analogy is absolutely assinine! It is ignorant and hurtful and reflects badly on your fellow conservatives who abhor the implication that the freeing of an enslaved people was not morally justified.
Always Right - "My history books said the south lost the Civil War, but apparently that was just a battle. The south lost the battle of 1861-1865, but now are winning the war. Excuse the map, I could not find one that had all the states colored in."
Clearly, the intent of the poster was to draw an association between the "red" states of the old South and the other "red" states of the of the West, Rockies, and Plains. This provides the context of my statements, and is the point you have completely missed. All of the territory occupied by the "lower 48" was within the jurisdiction of the United States in 1861. (We can ignore Alaska and Hawaii for the purpose of this discussion.) The CSA (aka "South," as in the "the south lost") was comprised of the 11 so-called seceded states. You may want to also claim Kentucky, Missouri, and the territory now occupied by Arizona and New Mexico, but the fact of the matter is the confederacy never maintained actual control of these areas.
Neither was the "Union" confined to the states you show in your graphic. It included the Pacific Coast states and territories, as well as the area in between. All Union, all garrisoned by Union and loyal militia troops during the War, and all contributors to the Union cause.
You attempt to make a narrow point about the relationship of the old south and the Bush victory, and fail to consider the importance of the other "red" state areas which were organized later into full-fledged states.
What is so hard for you to comprehend that the Union was comprised of states and territories?
The parties were far different then than they are now. Any comparison to today's party ideology is really difficult to equate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.