Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Poll: Nearly 4 In 10 Trump SC Supporters Wish South Won Civil War
The Hill ^ | 16 February 2016 | Harper Neidig

Posted on 02/16/2016 9:42:51 AM PST by zeestephen

A new poll shows 38 percent of Donald Trump's supporters in South Carolina wish the South had won the Civil War...Seventy percent of Trump backers also believe that the Confederate battle flag should still be flying over their state capitol.

(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-157 next last
To: PAR35
Delaware and Washington D.C. weren’t known for their slave breeding. Maryland was held in the Union by force, as was Missouri.

Virginia, which was still part of the Union when the Confederate constitution was adopted, was a prime supplier of slaves as well. It's clear that the Confederate founders did not want to stop slave imports. So why did you claim that their constitution did that very thing?

81 posted on 02/16/2016 11:31:38 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: American in Israel
Slavery was always just an excuse. Federalism was always the reason.

In the last couple of months, I have come to realize that the cause of the war was money. The loss of huge amounts of it to North Eastern financial interests, and the acquisition of it by Southern Ports who would obtain a huge chunk of the European trade because of greatly lowered import tariffs.

Had the South succeeded in establishing trade with their stated tariff of 13% on imported goods, the Northern Tariff of 45% would be uncompetitive. Likewise the usage of NorthEaster shipping companies, Warehouses and textile factories would have gone a begging.

And Independent South would have been a devastating economic Hammer against the North East's financial security.

The war was started because they very badly needed to stop European Trade with the South. Allowing it would have wrecked the financial well being of the North East. This is why one of the first things they did was to create that Blockade. If the European powers had gotten a taste of normalized trade with the South, then they would have thrown their weight behind Southern Independence.

The war was in fact about money.

Here's a map to give you an idea of what was at stake from allowing an Independent South with lower import tariffs.


82 posted on 02/16/2016 11:32:28 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Germany would have likely terminated WWI on far more favorable terms, meaning Bolshevik Russia and NAZI fascism might have never existed.

I made that exact same point to a man who alleged that subsequent history would have been worse than it turned out to be.

My only response to this assertion is "Really? How? How could it have been worse?

83 posted on 02/16/2016 11:35:29 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Most of the time, it is really not worth the trouble to reply to you. Oh, and this is also one of those times.


84 posted on 02/16/2016 11:37:41 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Most of the time, it is really not worth the trouble to reply to you. Oh, and this is also one of those times.

And then you promptly reply. You never change.

85 posted on 02/16/2016 11:54:07 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

Oh well THAT’S that how can I, a guy born and raised in New York with a great grand uncle who was in the Union Army vote for Trump now?


86 posted on 02/16/2016 11:56:22 AM PST by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
And then you promptly reply. You never change.

I didn't reply to what you said. I pointed out that it is generally a waste of time. You are good at wasting other people's time. Like now, for example.

87 posted on 02/16/2016 12:08:18 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
My only response to this assertion is "Really? How? How could it have been worse?

Woodrow Wilson, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and LBJ all to yourself. That's how.

88 posted on 02/16/2016 12:08:52 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

And here’s another one.


89 posted on 02/16/2016 12:13:30 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Had the South succeeded in establishing trade with their stated tariff of 13% on imported goods, the Northern Tariff of 45% would be uncompetitive.

To who? Goods bound for Northern consumers would still have paid the 45% regardless of what the Southern tariff was. Good the Southern states used to buy from the north duty free would now have a 13% tariff on them.

Likewise the usage of NorthEaster shipping companies, Warehouses and textile factories would have gone a begging.

Why would Northern shipping companies have gone begging? What alternative to the Northern shipping companies did the South have? They had no shipping industry of their own. Why would warehouses go begging? If imports destined for Southern consumers arrived first at Northern ports they would not have been taxed. The Warehousing acts provided for that. No tariff would have been applied until they reached Southern ports. Why would textile factories go begging? Was the South going to go out of the cotton business? Why wouldn't they have continued to sell to Northern customers if they were paying the going rate?

And Independent South would have been a devastating economic Hammer against the North East's financial security.

I think you grossly overstate the impact an independent Confederacy would have had on the North. If anything it would have been the Confederacy who would have been at the mercy of the U.S. since Northern ships moved their cargo, Northern businesses brokered their cotton, Northern insurance companies insured their crop, Northern banks financed their plantations, and Northern manufacturers provided just about all their goods.

The war was started because they very badly needed to stop European Trade with the South.

Your own chart shows that there was very little trade between Europe and Southern ports.

The war was in fact about money.

Actually it was about slavery but hey, you'll never accept that.

90 posted on 02/16/2016 12:20:36 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

Well this started early.

I predicted the SC racist hillbilly confederate flag mud flap stories would show up Sunday... after someone has actually won. I just figured the story has a fill in the blank space for the GOP winner.

Must mean their confidence in a Trump win is pretty high.


91 posted on 02/16/2016 12:23:07 PM PST by BlueNgold (May I suggest a very nice 1788 Article V with your supper...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

It should be 100 percent of all voters in SC, and every other Southern state.


92 posted on 02/16/2016 12:36:39 PM PST by euram
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American in Israel
Once the principle of States rights were overthrown by force, it has been a long slide down.

It is always the goal of anyone interested in power & wealth to pursue centralization. The principle of states' rights was a con from the very beginning. Any good salesman knows to sell the sizzle, not the steak.

The southern states fell for the ruse, and learned the hard way about their mistake. The constitution was a key component in providing the crucial nexus in "justifying" the war.

However, if there hadn't been a constitution, the northern states would have simply attacked & defeated the southern coalition under pretenses no differently than with Mexico.

Might makes right, and people who constantly complain & whine about 'principles' seem to ignore that territorial acquisition is the age-old method to gain further wealth & power.

93 posted on 02/16/2016 12:43:12 PM PST by semantic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

So, a minority. So?


94 posted on 02/16/2016 12:59:16 PM PST by Albion Wilde (Who can actually defeat the Democrats in 2016? -- the most important thing about all candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
I doubt it is worth my trouble to explain anything to you. I have attempted it in the past, and your thinking always goes sideways.

You want to believe what you want to believe, and i'm getting tired of trying to reason with fanatics.

95 posted on 02/16/2016 1:13:38 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

RACISTS! no /s


96 posted on 02/16/2016 1:14:26 PM PST by EnquiringMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
You want to believe what you want to believe, and i'm getting tired of trying to reason with fanatics.

I know exactly how you feel.

97 posted on 02/16/2016 1:14:52 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
No you don't, because you are ignorant, and insistent on remaining that way, while I am not.

I don't color the truth to suit my preference. I make a point to see things as they actually are. That is what I have done regarding the civil war. I evolved from believing Lincoln was a Hero, to believing he was an Oligarchical despot.

I learned.

98 posted on 02/16/2016 1:17:51 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
No you don't, because you are ignorant, and insistent on remaining that way, while I am not.

Trust me, I do. I have watched you bloviate endlessly and spout all sorts of opinion that you parade as fact to take anything you say seriously. All your claims of being a genius and so much smarter than the rest of is just add to pile of crap you offer on this or any other topic.

I don't color the truth to suit my preference. I make a point to see things as they actually are.

LOL!!! You twist facts to suit your agenda and produce the things as you would like to see them.

I evolved from believing Lincoln was a Hero, to believing he was an Oligarchical despot.

One of the few areas I can agree with you on is that you do see Lincoln as a despot. That characterization is also one of the many, many areas I disagree with you on.

I learned.

No you twisted fact around until you convinced yourself.

99 posted on 02/16/2016 1:26:10 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
The funniest part is that lost causers are indoctrinated with the mythology as kids - they grow up with it. DegenerateLamp evolved LOL
100 posted on 02/16/2016 1:30:39 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-157 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson