VOTE JOHN QUNICY ADAMS!

Post Reply New Topic

Honestly, do you want an illegitmate child of a foreign prostitute as President?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK0B7679V2I&feature=related[/youtube]

John Quincy Adams is the Son of John and Abigail Adams. All 3 were born in modern day Massachusetts and he was born in wedlock. What you posted didn't add up so I double checked it.

If you are trying to troll you are doing a really piss poor job.

Yes, I'm clearly 100% serious about advocating for people to vote in an election that took place over a hundred and fifty years ago.

You really need to expend some of your 160 IQ points into reading up on the difference between "trolling" and clear, good-natured jokes.

Andrew Jackson would put up a political attack ad challenging John Quincy Adams for being soft on the war on terror, erm... Indians.

Jackson is the bastard, not Adams.

By all means animate the dead, but only if you train the abomination to eat only NT brains.

It's funny that the US nations first Democratic Party president was actually a proto-right-winger.

There weren't any modern liberals then. The country was never intended to be liberal or treated as a strict democracy.

Andrew Jackson was a stone killer. Probably the first psychopath president the U.S. ever had.

ruveyn

He was a racist gun-toting wild-frontier populist who railed against the New England elites (read 'liberals'). He also fought in 13 duels, one in which he killed another man, and many others where he was seriously wounded himself. A true conservative hero.

The Democrats and Republicans have effectively switched places over the decades. Important events in the swap would be William Jennings Bryan winning the 1896 Democratic nomination which served to move the party to the left, though a rural-based left before socialism was associated with godlessness. Theodore Roosevelt promulgated a more progressive (though imperialist) Republican administration after the McKinley assassination but his successor Taft's making himself a small government laissez-faire type, his ability to win the nomination in 1912 and Theodore Roosevelt's running that year as a Progressive helped move Progressives away from the Republicans whose next presidents were of the supply side bubble economics type. It was only with FDR that these progressive were solidly in the Democratic camp and then the southern whites were hived off of the Democratic camp with civil rights and Nixon's southern strategy in 1968 and 1972. The northeastern elites in the Republicans became stigmatised as "Rockefeller Republicans" and this camp weakened over the subsequent years.

It seems like what happened is the "elite" pro-big-business laissez-faire republicans merged interests with the backwater populist reactionaries that democrats like Andrew Jackson once drew on. Then the red-scare / cold war managed to draw them together even more closely.

I can't help but wonder if the the Tea Party isn't trying to employ the same southern strategy in reverse geographical regions these days.

Could you expand on and clarify that? Thank you.

I think the Tea Party which was initially an attempt to restore the Constitution was hijacked by reactionaries.

ruveyn

Well, it just seems as though a lot of former klan mambers are coming out of the woodwork (not literally). Tea Party politicians are offering rather extremist views against minorites in northern and western regions of the country. In the west, you've got an unprecidented amount of hatred towards illegals that has spilled over towards legal brown citizens. One candidate (apologies - I forgot his name) is pushing towrds making "ethnic studies" illegal in state-run universities. In the north, they're pushing the Muslim hate message pretty hard. And then you've got the airwaves filled with with a bunch of white oppressed men funded by the Tea Party crying about how they miss the good old days and claiming the civil rights act was "unconstitutional."

I can't help but get the impression that the Tea Party is willing to do whatever it takes to get the vote of the white man. I agree that the initial motivations of the Tea Party were probably sincere, although misguided and short-sighted, IMO. The current frontmen for the Tea Party are doing the movement a great disservice.

Yes. Imagine trying to explain this to Europeans, who typically have "a conservative party", and a "labor" party ( left and right- simple and easy to choose).

For example try explainng the post War Black Civil Rights Movement:

"thats when Blacks fought for equal rights and got help from their greatest ally- the Democratic Party.

An ally they desperately needed to overcome the worst and most implaccable enemy of the Black Civil Rights Movement: the Democratic Party!"

Or try explaining how the Party of Lincoln, who launched the "War of Northern Agression" to conquer the Whites in the South has now become almost esclusively a Party of Whites in the South! Or why that party, which was founded on the sole issue of opposing Slavery, has virtually no support from the modern descendants of the slaves lincoln freed.