|
Isn't it going to take 10 minutes before we all start killing each other if Washington isn't our
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
Lemming posted:Isn't it going to take 10 minutes before we all start killing each other if Washington isn't our The Whiskey Rebellion probably would go down either way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Abner Cadaver II posted:The Whiskey Rebellion probably would go down either way. drat Federalists better not even think about instituting a tax on distillation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Oiled and Ready posted:so are these elections considered canon for future elections or do we reset each time? This impacts my vote. I feel like if we're carrying the canon forward I need Washington but if we aren't I got to go with Jay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Isn't it going to take 10 minutes before we all start killing each other if Washington isn't our What country before ever existed a century & a half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure. Oiled and Ready posted:so are these elections considered canon for future elections or do we reset each time? This impacts my vote. I feel like if we're carrying the canon forward I need Washington but if we aren't I got to go with Jay. My background posts will treat each election independently. There would be no way for me to discuss the issues surrounding the election or to post the primers I have planned on various groups, individuals, and issues. It would also make later elections problematic. If you, or anyone else, would like to consider these elections to be part of a single, cohesive timeline then go ahead. I would love to see someone try to form a narrative. I'm not going to force that on the thread, though. QuoProQuid has issued a correction as of 02:24 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:My background posts will treat each election independently. There would be no way for me to discuss the issues surrounding the election or to post the primers I have planned on various groups, individuals, and issues. It would also make later elections problematic. In that case: alpha_destroy posted:I fear we are going to gently caress up right at the beginning. If we don't elect Washington we will be making a huge mistake. So I am going to lay out a multi-faceted argument for why we need to vote Washington.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
this election really has very little to do with the rest, even the next one, because the ridiculous fiction of american politicians being above party politics was still at least imaginable in the atmosphere of 1792. i think by the next election there were already anti-federalist attack pamphlets out against washington, though that was an extreme minority position. this election, though, wasn't even really a dry run for american democracy we'll really be able to get into our groove starting in 1800 the big questions for the electoral historiography of this thread are already starting to form however! how ahistorical/lf is too ahistorical/lf, are we going to form our own parallel narrative, probably other things ive been skimming over i see a great future of meaningless arguments ahead for this thread
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
We're going to end up with Adams/Washington, I'm guessing. Adams gets the veep nod from both Jay and Washington supporters, and I'd bet that Washington has more support than Jay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
I'd just like to say that this thread is a lot of fun so far, and I'm looking forward to learning more than I learned from my history classes. E: Also, I look forward to hilarious posts explaining how the timeline "fixes" itself every time we alter history. fade5 has issued a correction as of 03:53 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
i want to emphasize that george washington was a profiteering land speculator would it be too much to say that the only reason he rebelled was because the british crown tried to protect the rights of their indian subjects against his white supremacist land grabbing? yes. but i still really want to say it. so just pretend i said it also pretend i compared this to israel and palestine, that's really what this thread needs
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:i want to emphasize that george washington was a profiteering land speculator Oystertoadfish, I always appreciated you. This post is a good example of why I appreciate you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
alpha_destroy posted:Oystertoadfish, I always appreciated you. This post is a good example of why I appreciate you. thanks! if that other octoberwhatever guy i remember from when i posted in sas is reading ( i never remember anybody's names its nothing personal) i want to let him know that i tried to watch a maryland game but turned it off angrily when they started winning i could maybe handle a maryland away game. probably not edit: that guy nobody's voting for would definitely be a terps fan, terps are pro-slavery just like lefty driesell tried to enslave moses malone oystertoadfish has issued a correction as of 05:13 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
I'm interested by this Robert Harrison character who was running but couldn't be bothered to articulate any political positions to anyone, ever. I guess it's just that it doesn't correspond to anything I know about what it means to run for office. Or maybe he was just going for that "too cool to care" vibe, which I assume to be timeless.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
i think in the constitutional convention they honestly expected presidential elections to be conducted almost purely on a 'favorite son' basis where someone with support in one or two states would rally the electors to his side, in which case actual political positions would be baked in, the electors being people who had known the candidate for years and been won over on the basis of regional/local politics, and the whole thing would really just be a power struggle among local elites. george mason thought 95% of elections would end up in the house of representatives, not decided by the electoral college, because back then they just couldn't imagine the whole country unifying behind two candidates. which happened within a decade the founders were dumb shits who hated everything we pretend they loved actually it might be more accurate to say they pretended to hate everything we pretend to love, but loved everything we pretend to hate. im not really gonna overthink this it sounds too good to revise edit: just read that one page of that book and realize how deeply unable these people were to imagine the consequences of their constitutionally conventionary actions. and we like to pretend they had a 200+ year vision oystertoadfish has issued a correction as of 05:30 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
That makes sense, I had a feeling the reason would be because he's a piece of poo poo in one way or another. I'm definitely curious to see if any of these candidates, especially in the first thirty years or so, will be Actually Good.
A Neurotic Jew has issued a correction as of 05:51 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:i think in the constitutional convention they honestly expected presidential elections to be conducted almost purely on a 'favorite son' basis where someone with support in one or two states would rally the electors to his side, in which case actual political positions would be baked in, the electors being people who had known the candidate for years and been won over on the basis of regional/local politics, and the whole thing would really just be a power struggle among local elites. george mason thought 95% of elections would end up in the house of representatives, not decided by the electoral college, because back then they just couldn't imagine the whole country unifying behind two candidates. which happened within a decade Reminder that only 1.3% of the population voted in this election
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
^^^^ i think i saw a wikipedia thing saying 0.88% lemme find a link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1792#Popular_vote footnote (b) here gives that number. which only strengthens your pointA Neurotic Jew posted:That makes sense, I had a feeling the reason would be because he's a piece of poo poo in one way or another. I'm definitely curious to see if any of these candidates, especially in the first thirty years or so, will be Actually Good. none of them will ever be good. actually either within the purview of this thread or before the heat death of the universe oystertoadfish has issued a correction as of 05:59 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
I think that everyone in this thread should have to submit documentation that they are white, male landholders.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:^^^^ i think i saw a wikipedia thing saying 0.88% lemme find a link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1792#Popular_vote footnote (b) here gives that number. which only strengthens your point That's for the 1792 election, but yes voter turnout was very low back then
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
Wanamingo posted:That's for the 1792 election, but yes voter turnout was very low back then haha i wasnt paying any loving attention fair point. i am owned. i own it to be so edit: as a patriotic slave i demand that my vote be invalidated
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I think that everyone in this thread should have to submit documentation that they are white, male landholders. And citizens. And literate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
Feral_Shofixti posted:And literate.  
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I think that everyone in this thread should have to submit documentation that they are white, male landholders. They are all members of this forum.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
Gregoriev posted:John Adams is neither cool nor good. I would like to write in Thomas Paine, the coolest proto-socialist founding father. (I actually voted Washington/Jay, as much of a poo poo as John Jay was) ^This right here is a bombshell that y'all sheeple doing the truffle shuffle for Adams need to recognize. This Oracle has brought to light the soon to be realized ill intents of Emperor Rotundus I. If only I could vote for the honorable General Washington twice. He fought for our independence and, fittingly, he is the only man with the fortitude to declare himself an Independent, not a standard bearer for a fractious tyrant-in-training fraternity! To hell with so-called "Federalists," give me a free American before all else!!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
hahaha holy poo poo, for elections from 1868 to 1964, everyone should have to take a test like this and pass it to get a password so they can log in to vote
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
Ali Alkali posted:They are all members of this forum. But can they prove they're members? We need a long-form receipt showing purchase of membership.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
Feral_Shofixti posted:hahaha holy poo poo, for elections from 1868 to 1964, everyone should have to take a test like this and pass it to get a password so they can log in to vote They don’t have to take it if their grandfather had stairs in his house. Platystemon has issued a correction as of 07:53 on Nov 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
voted jay/washington, death to states rights
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:They don’t have to take it if their grandfather had stairs in his house. Maternal or paternal. Only of mine had stairs in his house.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
I'm going to remain as close to my modern day views as possible, while skipping future knowledge. You are kidding yourself if you think this Constitution power grab by the bougie Northern fucks from the aristocratic Southern fucks will not lead to trouble. There is no place for slavery in a free society, and our domestic troubles are going to tear us apart sooner than the bastards in the UK. There's no way to stop it, and if the slaveholders cannot move to a proper capitalist society, we'll be lagging behind in the new trends forever. I'm aghast at the control the bougie fucks have, and once abolition comes we may be trading chattel slavery for wage slavery, but gently caress, people are suffering now. Our colonies do not agree on basic rights and goals, and the Federalist project is doomed. I do not oppose it, for the hope it can see to the rights of all humans, but it cannot be compromised. Adams/Jay. Washington may be a hero, but he'll just paper over the status quo and delay the necessary conversation. I don't give a rat's rear end that we're not supposed to consider slavery now, it must end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Also this is a really cool idea for a thread!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:the founders were dumb shits who hated everything we pretend they loved I think that particularly among leftists there is an exaggeration of how little important actors in the revolutionary era actually cared about political ideals or good government. I've seen a lot of posts here (not this thread) implying that joining the Revolution was something rich people did to make mad ca$h and poor people really did not care. This is grossly exaggerated, just as a lot of traditional history grossly exaggerates patriotism and ideals among the populace. Many elites, including slave owners, did have some commitment to these ideals and despite the fact that many of them had disdain/panic over the ~masses~ (not unlike many posters' concerns about stupid flyover country Republicans), many also hoped that after some time people would be ready. I don't agree overall, but the idea that people need to be "prepared" for democracy and that mass voting that doesn't lead to an unstable government can only take place under certain conditions is not exactly something that has died. Basically it's like people read dumb textbooks in high school, then discover Zinn and are like "whoa!", and then don't delve into primary documents because no one has time for that. that's my story, you people are going to get that middle class monarchy lover Adams elected!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Haze Thank Liberty posted:that's my story, you people are going to get that middle class monarchy lover Adams elected! Draft Thomas Paine!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
foobardog posted:Draft Thomas Paine! I want a Paine/Adams team up so they can fight all day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
otf, could you provide us with a multifarious spreadsheet to know exactly who would be the best Aussie Rules President? In all seriousness, Jay receives my vote for President, and Washington my vote for Vice President. Death to orthodoxy!
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
It's going to be great when this thread continually elects Eugene Debs to be Premier for the Union of Socialist American States.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
foobardog posted:It's going to be great when this thread continually elects Eugene Debs to be Premier for the Union of Socialist American States. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
So how long until the election happens? The (white, male, landowning) people are eager to see who leads this new country.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
I was being dumb calling the founders dumb shits, the ones who played a leading role were mostly lawyers with a track record of being good at thinking and reading and stuff. I should've just said they couldn't see the future, which wouldve helped make my little point about the motives people impute on them and the causes they make them carry water for the worst thing about being so simplistic as to call them dumb though is that it's just another way of avoiding the difficult and interesting task of trying to understand events and ideas from their perspective. Which will be a strange thing for this thread to deal with they were big believers in good government by any standard. They were democratic by the standards of their time and they were anti democratic by any modern respectable American standard. They used classical sources in the same self centered way we use their lives and writings today. It's interesting to swim against the current on analysis and I obviously indulge in that but the really interesting thing is to try to put yourself in everyone's shoes and immerse yourself in the murky uncertainty of history My phone wants to capitalize and I think the true test of my ideals is that I'm too lazy to change the settings and stop it
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 23:48 |
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:My phone wants to capitalize and I think the true test of my ideals is that I'm too lazy to change the settings and stop it shitposting ruined by the onslaught of technology. thanks, obama.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2015 23:15
|
|