|
andrew jackson isnt actually in hell, he's in a level of purgatory where to survive he has to buy everything with fiat money
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 01:00 |
|
|
# ? May 10, 2024 20:18 |
|
Finally another Adams to vote for!
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 02:06 |
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:putting jackson on the twenty is the greatest historical troll of all time and i salute whoever came up with it all those decades ago the troll keeps getting better because the mint decided to ignore the sensible "women on $20s" campaign and go with adding a woman to the $10, lumping some woman in with an actual cool president lol
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 02:12 |
|
Unless I missed something recently, the US Treasury hasn't made any decisions on that yet. They were going to move forward with taking Hamilton off the $10, but then "Hamilton" came out on Broadway and apparently they've been inundated with demands to leave him there ever since. Meanwhile I don't think there's anybody at all defending Jackson being on the $20 so I don't know why they haven't gone ahead and dropped his rear end yet.
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 02:17 |
|
So how vocal was Jackson about shitcanning the electoral college, since ya know, we still have that thing today. I guess it ended up being a low priority cuz it didn't involve killing and displacing a bunch of people.
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 02:33 |
|
just rust posted:So how vocal was Jackson about shitcanning the electoral college, since ya know, we still have that thing today. I guess it ended up being a low priority cuz it didn't involve killing and displacing a bunch of people. Jackson was one of the earliest and loudest advocates for popular democracy and included in his campaign proposals for the direct election of Senators and the President. Toward the end of his Presidency, he went as far as to advocate an elected federal judiciary and Supreme Court. He considered the country's biggest threat not to be majoritarianism, as Jefferson and Hamilton both feared, but entrenched elites who would use and abuse the federal government to enrich themselves at the expense of the most vulnerable. His fanatical crusade against the Bank of the United States was an extension of that. To him, the institution enabled the absolute worst excesses of the monied class and allowed them to retain political power without democratic oversight. I have to double-check for specifics, but Jackson's attempts to democratize Congress ran headlong into Clay, Calhoun, and Webster who used parliamentary maneuvers to prevent them from ever leaving committee. All three men were fundamentally opposed to Jacksonian democracy, as it would undercut their own power and influence. Richard Nixon would run into a similar issue in 1969, when his amendment to abolish the Electoral College was filibustered to death in the Senate. As you might imagine, Congressmen tend to be opposed to amendments that would curtail their authority.
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 03:01 |
CuwiKhons posted:Unless I missed something recently, the US Treasury hasn't made any decisions on that yet. They were going to move forward with taking Hamilton off the $10, but then "Hamilton" came out on Broadway and apparently they've been inundated with demands to leave him there ever since. Meanwhile I don't think there's anybody at all defending Jackson being on the $20 so I don't know why they haven't gone ahead and dropped his rear end yet. Wasn't the $20 redesigned relatively recently? I always assumed this was the reason for choosing the $10 over the $20.
|
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 03:07 |
|
O'Malley talking fast because he doesn't know when he's ever gonna have a national platform to speak.
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 03:09 |
|
CuwiKhons posted:Unless I missed something recently, the US Treasury hasn't made any decisions on that yet. They were going to move forward with taking Hamilton off the $10, they're adding a woman to the 10, not removing hamilton. the woman will be on the back or in a corner somewhere. really
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 03:59 |
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:they're adding a woman to the 10, not removing hamilton. the woman will be on the back or in a corner somewhere. really Honestly, they should replace everyone with a Lady Liberty. Dead presidents were the worst thing that ever happened to American currency, aesthetically. Anyway, guess I'm jumping on the JQA .
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 04:08 |
|
SpRahl posted:Pretty much the only reason to vote Jackson is fear that the fucker would rise from the grave and personally shoot you, because thats something he would do. That's good enough for me. Vote Jackson to Make America Great For The First Time.
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 09:17 |
|
Yoshifan823 posted:O'Malley talking fast because he doesn't know when he's ever gonna have a national platform to speak. O'Malley ran in 1824? It's possible of course, and apparently he left as much of an impression back then as he does now.
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 10:02 |
I'm voting for the least genocidal anti-slavery guy
|
|
# ? Jan 18, 2016 10:13 |
|
Ibogaine posted:O'Malley ran in 1824? Well, per Wikipedia, O'Malley is descended from a War of 1812 veteran, so they must have been referring to that O'Malley running. Clearly, he must have done just as good a job as his descendant. Also, while I support JQA, I hate that he's picked Calhoun as VP. Not only are his ideas odious, but also, how can you trust a man who is incapable of having a good portrait made of him?
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 06:40 |
|
Did JQA pick Calhoun, or did the party leadership?
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 06:45 |
|
As Hamilton trash, we should know that Vice President isn't a real job anyway.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 07:07 |
|
Vote Henry Clay, receive Parliamentary Democracy. Empress Theonora posted:As Hamilton trash, we should know that Vice President isn't a real job anyway. "The Vice Presidency isn't worth a bucket of warm piss." - Known Opinion Haver, John "Cactus Jack" Garner IV.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 13:58 |
|
Lycus posted:Did JQA pick Calhoun, or did the party leadership? He apparently put himself forward and then got votes from the supporters of both, Jackson and Adams. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1824 quote:Secretary of War John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, who was initially a fifth candidate in the early stages of consideration, declined to run for president, but did decide to seek the vice presidency. For president, he backed Jackson, whose political beliefs he considered more compatible with those of most voters in the southern states. Both Adams and Jackson supporters backed Calhoun's candidacy as vice president, thus he easily secured the majority of electoral votes he needed to secure that office. In reality, Calhoun was vehemently opposed to nearly all of Adams's policies, but he did nothing to dissuade Adams supporters from voting for him for vice president.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:34 |
|
Lycus posted:Did JQA pick Calhoun, or did the party leadership? Calhoun let it be known that he would be willing to take the Vice Presidency, regardless of who won, and so the Jacksonian and Anti-Jacksonian factions coalesced around him. JQA and Calhoun didn't really have a lot in common, personally or politically, and were only tied together by the party's desire to have a strong vice president who might one day have their nomination undisputed. Calhoun is probably the only post-12th Amendment Vice President to be elected overwhelmingly and on his own virtues.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 14:35 |
|
Jackson vs Adams is legitimately very difficult. If I'm a contemporary, then Jackson is clearly my main man. If I'm present day, Adams is the obvious choice. Jackson is absolutely right about the BUS and the American System. They are intended to work together to finance internal improvements, using taxes as well as bonds and deposits. The Capital Class will bankroll improvement projects, which will be built by their own companies, and which will tend to benefit them primarily. The USA will pay back the bondholders with interest. The entire scheme is pure Hamilton, and the result is a permanent Capital Class with a claim on tax revenues, which derives almost all the benefits of internal improvements. As a lowlife shitkicking yeoman farmer from Alabama, Jackson represents my only chance to kick those drat Yankees in the nuts. On the other hand, with the benefit of hindsight, the American System was put into place by Lincoln. It ended up mostly how Jackson predicted, but it did eventually benefit the proles. Therefore, getting the Whigs going strong early is probably a good idea. I'm so torn. On a more philosophical level, the question is whether America grew to be the most powerful nation on earth because of technological advances or because of its embrace of democracy. That debate is still not settled. For my part, I tend to side with Technology, and so..... Adams is my guy.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 15:48 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:Jackson was one of the earliest and loudest advocates for popular democracy... Thanks for this. I guess even with an immensely popular president such as Jackson it would still be nearly impossible to get the entrenched political class to go along with loosening their grip on the reigns, regardless of the public mandate the president could claim to have on his side. Oh well, I voted for JQA anyways.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 18:45 |
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:Jackson vs Adams is legitimately very difficult. If I'm a contemporary, then Jackson is clearly my main man. If I'm present day, Adams is the obvious choice. Also Jackson is, you know, a monster.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2016 21:46 |
|
Badger of Basra posted:Also Jackson is, you know, a monster. In the end they all are, bro.
|
# ? Jan 21, 2016 18:09 |
|
Yeah, if there has been one thing I gathered from learning about these elections in more depth is that the absolute worst candidates on slavery were some of the best on actual democracy. It's interesting because I'm finally reading Coates's article on reparations (I'm slow, OK?), and he suggests that the existence of slavery was seen as a necessity for actual democracy. It reminds me a lot of that old Bob the Angry Flower comic where the citizens of Galt's Gulch are yelled at because they didn't remember to bring the necessary robots to do all the labor. But anyway, back in ahistorical democratic socialist mode, Adams stands out clear here. Calhoun is terrible and I can only hope he is seriously marginalized as Vice President. For all of Jackson's legitimate acknowledgement of the bullshit the Northeastern elites and bankers are pulling, the blind spot and acceptance of slavery as a necessity makes it so much crocodile tears. The rest of these jokers don't even dignify a response.
|
# ? Jan 21, 2016 22:23 |
|
Calhoun is so bad that he makes me want to vote for the Clay/Sanford ticket.
|
# ? Jan 21, 2016 22:39 |
|
Platystemon posted:Calhoun is so bad that he makes me want to vote for the Clay/Sanford ticket. It's the only true Hamiltonian ticket.
|
# ? Jan 21, 2016 22:40 |
|
Platystemon posted:Calhoun is so bad that he makes me want to vote for the Clay/Sanford ticket. Sanford looks less terrible than the rest of the VP situation but Clay seems awful.
|
# ? Jan 21, 2016 22:41 |
|
I vote for J Q A
|
# ? Jan 21, 2016 22:41 |
|
Cthulhu Dreams posted:Sanford looks less terrible than the rest of the VP situation but Clay seems awful. In real life Clay became an Adams Man after the election. It wasn't his last party shift.
|
# ? Jan 21, 2016 22:43 |
|
Cthulhu Dreams posted:Sanford looks less terrible than the rest of the VP situation but Clay seems awful. I don't know. Nathaniel Macon's position of "I hate literally everyone and everything" seems pretty appealing. QuoProQuid has issued a correction as of 01:56 on Jan 22, 2016 |
# ? Jan 22, 2016 01:50 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:I don't know. Nathaniel Macon's position of "I hate literally everyone and everything" seems pretty appealing. Holy poo poo, I skimmed past him but you are COMPLETELY RIGHT. Edit: Yep, decided to go with Stroke-Crippled Elder Statesman / Obstructionist Madman 1824. Macon for Effectively President please ignore that Crawford is pretty much back to functioning by election time and stays that way, albeit more comfortable as a judge in his home state than in federal service, until his death in 1834. Goatse James Bond has issued a correction as of 05:30 on Jan 24, 2016 |
# ? Jan 22, 2016 02:50 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:I don't know. Nathaniel Macon's position of "I hate literally everyone and everything" seems pretty appealing. He appears to be very pro slavery and thus can burn. Ignoring that issue, he does seem like an anti-government dick though - I hate the trend in politics that suggests that civil service can never do anything useful ever so I really don't like him. OK I am coming around to your 'hates all things' assessment. Corek posted:In real life Clay became an Adams Man after the election. It wasn't his last party shift. That is quite funny - yeah, I don't really know who any of these guys are so am voting on the biography. I dislike clay because of the vocal proponent of slavery thing though so unless he has a change of heart I'm likely to still dislike him though.
|
# ? Jan 22, 2016 03:23 |
|
Voted Andrew Jackson because I vote based purely on '5 most badass presidents' lists on Cracked.
|
# ? Jan 22, 2016 21:24 |
|
Thank you all for voting. In another landslide, John Quincy Adams has succeeded his father to become the President of the United States, and Protector of Their Liberties. With this large public mandate, Adams hopes to introduce a comprehensive plan to improve the national economy and to strengthen public education. Though Congress has dismissed early proposals calling for, observatories and “national laboratories,” Adams hopes that he and his Vice President John C. Calhoun can transform the country. RESULTS BREAKDOWN Most Popular Ticket: John Quincy Adams / John Caldwell Calhoun (Democratic-Republican) - 52 votes (73.2%) Andrew Jackson / John Caldwell Calhoun (Democratic-Republican) - 10 votes (14.1%) Henry Clay / Nathan Sanford (Democratic-Republican) - 9 votes (12.7%) William Harris Crawford / Nathaniel Macon (Democratic-Republican) - 0 votes (0.0%)
|
# ? Jan 24, 2016 14:32 |
|
ELECTION OF 1828 Click here to vote in the Election of 1828! Background: In 1824, the Jacksonians were convinced that they might finally gain control of the United States Government and turn it into a tool for the masses. When they were, instead set off fury and anger not seen since the Revolution. Despite winning the popular vote by a wide margin, Jackson was denied the Presidency by a cabal of party men led by Henry Clay. Instead, Clay elevated the aristocratic John Quincy Adams, who has promised to turn a blind eye to slavery for the support. Since the Election, little has happened to convince the public that they are not being manipulated by elites. While Adams has pursued ambitious public works projects, very few have seen these projects directly benefit them. Even Congress has raised objections, because his proposals seem to disproportionately some sectors of the economy at the expense of others. Others still question whether a President elected by the House deserves such an expansive agenda. Worse yet, the President has signed into law an extremely robust tariff that seems engineered to harm the South. Recognizing an opportunity to protect his constituents while damaging his unpopular enemies, Congressman Martin Van Buren campaigned in Congress to set high tariffs to protect Mid-Atlantic and Western agricultural products from foreign competition. The tariff also set restrictive import restrictions on textiles, which harmed British manufacturers. Southern planters were forced to buy extremely expensive substitutes from domestic suppliers or go out of business. In Virginia, this tariff has earned the moniker, “The Tariff of Abominations” and communities across the South have accused it of being unconstitutional. Vice President Calhoun opposes the tariff so much that he drafted the South Carolina Exposition, asserting the right of a state to nullify federal law. To counteract Jackson's growing network of supporters, Adams has tried to make an issue out of Jackson's personal character. Jackson’s history of martial successes has been repainted as the work of a bloodthirsty maniac. Jackson’s history of executing army deserters and natives has come under attack as unnecessarily cruel. Not even Jackson’s marriage to Rachel Donelson has been safe from attack. When Rachel married Jackson, both believed that she had been properly divorced from her first husband. When it was revealed that the papers were improperly filled, Adams turned the matter into a political scandal. He has accused Rachel of being a bigamist, an adultereress, and a prostitute. He has accused Jackson as being insufficiently Christian to serve as President. After the Jacksonians swept through Congress in 1826, Adams and company tried to distance themselves from the old Democratic-Republicans and instead establish a new party, the National Republicans. Based on the economic concepts of Henry Clay, they can complete the American System by discrediting Jackson. Jackson himself leads the newly rechristened Democratic Party, which styles itself as a defender of the common man. The Candidates: DEMOCRATIC PARTY CANDIDATES: Presidential Nominee: Andrew Jackson
Vice Presidential Nominee: John Caldwell Calhoun
NATIONAL REPUBLICAN PARTY CANDIDATES: Presidential Nominee: John Quincy Adams
Vice Presidential Nominee: Richard Rush
QuoProQuid has issued a correction as of 02:32 on Jan 31, 2016 |
# ? Jan 24, 2016 14:41 |
|
I am writing this from a borrowed tablet at a friend's house, so I am sure there are typos throughout the above. If you notice any errors, either grammatical or factual, let me know and I will correct after I get home. The entire DMV is shut down until Monday.
|
# ? Jan 24, 2016 14:43 |
|
Second verse, same as the first. JQA motherfucker.
|
# ? Jan 24, 2016 16:06 |
|
What an awful loving election
|
# ? Jan 24, 2016 16:41 |
|
I can't believe someone would stoop so low as to characterize Andrew Jackson as a bloodthirsty maniac.
|
# ? Jan 24, 2016 16:50 |
|
|
# ? May 10, 2024 20:18 |
|
memy posted:What an awful loving election The only problem with JQA I'm seeing is his misguided foray into protectionism. Well, and maligning Jackson's wife, I guess.
|
# ? Jan 24, 2016 17:10 |