|
Not sure why all you guys are so eager to vote for huge racist Greeley.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
Corek posted:I actually tried looking up the results for that party and apparently they got so few votes it shows up as 0 in the most comprehensive source I can find. Yeah, it doesn't seem like her vote total was ever tallied, but it was pretty small. Not terribly surprising though. Still, that must've taken some massive (metaphorical) balls to run as a woman while having to put up with bullshit like this: quote:Those who objected to her candidacy usually objected on the basis of her gender and not her age. In fact, one Congressman told her that because she was a woman, she wasn't a U.S. citizen. If you're not a U.S. citizen, you can't vote and you can't run for President of the United States. Also, her take on the election: quote:Victoria Woodhull said that even Jesus Christ couldn't have beaten Ulysses Grant. Mark Twain posted:"Well, what in hell do you want!"  he owned Mark Twain
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Not sure why all you guys are so eager to vote for huge racist Greeley. He's friends with Karl Marx though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
1872 version of Bernie bros!!!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:1872 version of Bernie bros!!! I'm predicting an alcohol ban and universal suffrage as a result of this election.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
Greely is basically a nut. He can't keep his positions straight, and even if you like Marx, phrenology and spiritualism are a real bad sign. Plus, his whole reasoning for ending reconstruction sounds a lot like my pathetic argument for voting for McClellan. You know how all the problems with protecting the civil rights of blacks had been solved in 1872? He also seems like a bit of a confederate sympathizer. Black may have some interesting views on the side, but the central tenet of his platform is something that the country isn't ready to face yet. I wouldn't've expected modern-day goons to vote for him. I thought they liked their booze. Grant's still your man for reconstruction, civil rights, and curbing the age-old American pastime of committing genocide against the native americans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
"We did it, everyone. We passed the Thirteenth Amendment! Racism is over!" -- Horace Greeley, 1872
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Black may have some interesting views on the side, but the central tenet of his platform is something that the country isn't ready to face yet. I wouldn't've expected modern-day goons to vote for him. I thought they liked their booze. We need some issue polling. I wonder if the #1 goon issue is voter enfranchisement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:The fact that this wasn't a race between Greeley and Black in real life is a testament is to how terrible past Americans were. You could vote for a nut, a guy who believes in a good Christian America or you know, the president who wiped out the KKK and wants to continue Reconstruction. Plus he doesn't hate Native Americans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
I think I cast my vote too early this time. I keep changing my mind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Not sure why all you guys are so eager to vote for huge racist Greeley. He's gonna die and Benjamin Brown seems cool
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Black may have some interesting views on the side, but the central tenet of his platform is something that the country isn't ready to face yet. I wouldn't've expected modern-day goons to vote for him. I thought they liked their booze. Cthulhu Dreams posted:I'm predicting an alcohol ban and universal suffrage as a result of this election. The Prohibition Party at this point in history wasn't angling for a ban, because they knew how worthless such a law would be. These guys were gradualists, favoring increased education and regulation until social norms shifted against drinking and toward racial, gender and economic equality. They were also bimetallists, but hey, no one's perfect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
We'll get plenty of real Marxists later. Right now we need to put up a popular front in order to destroy the last remnants of the Southern reactionaries. Grant is my man.GSD posted:I think I cast my vote too early this time. I keep changing my mind. You're a regular Greeley.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
Bob Ojeda posted:He's gonna die and Benjamin Brown seems cool This is a good argument, Brown basically wants to do what grant does but with less corruption.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
if this thread ends reconstruction and un-wins the civil even sooner than real america did it would be proof for all time that goons are worthless imho
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
I'm pulling for a Grant-Greeley-Black triumvirate. I am sure this is sensible, workable, and possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 06:33
|
|
|
*checks pocket watch impatiently* hmmm still not debs o'clock yet
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
GHOST OF TROUP *burns telegraph station to ground*
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
Empress Theonora posted:if this thread ends reconstruction and un-wins the civil even sooner than real america did it would be proof for all time that goons are worthless imho We've been winning the civil war for like 10 elections now
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
Grant is great in theory but we have now seen how he works in practice. Based on what we have seen of his supreme incompetence so far, how can anyone in good conscience vote for the man a second time?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
Voting for the first Black president.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
I'm going all the way again with JQA again
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Had it with you Greeley-bots. The South has refused the arbitration of the ballot box, and the verdict of the field of war. A complete, top-to-bottom reconstruction of their anti-democratic society is crucial. Americans allowed Grant to win the war - can we allow him to lose the peace? If we fail, this country will remain split for over a century. If we let Grant succeed, we might even one day have a black President. EDIT - We certainly won't have a crushing economic depression next year that in a better world would cause us to question our whole way of life, why would you assume that? By the way, I have conceived the idea of a race of mechanical men which will replace the need for labor and usher in a golden age. I will call these devices "robots," from the Slavic word "to work." One day, mankind will be transformed by these faithful companions, and men who refuse to think for themselves will be given the name "bots" as a hurtful term of abuse. It has been foreseen Jai Guru Dave has issued a correction as of 16:41 on Apr 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
no one in the 1800s actually thought there would ever be a black president right that'd be as ridiculous as a anti-masonic president
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
I feel that with such a competitive field it would be a great help to know each of the Honorable candidates' positions on the meat and potato issues held close by the electorate. Those being, of course: the Freemason Menace, Hard Cider, Free-Mounting, and Hollow Earth exploration. It's all well and good we have managed to sever yet another head of our dear little hydra known as the wretched South. But we all know that any man elected president will quite obviously continue this Sisyphean task of continuously humbling Dixie, for it is a solemn duty that has become inseparable from the title President of the United States and Protector of Their Liberties. At least we know that the Honorable President General Grant is a friend of hard cider while these Prohibitionists are clearly not. I am certain that Mr. Greeley would eagerly share with us his plans for the Hollow Earth if someone were to simply ask.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Gentlemen, so far I'm unmoved. Who's the anti-papist of the lot?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Gentlemen, so far I'm unmoved. Who's the anti-papist of the lot? Definitely not Charles O'Conor (who I believe is the first Catholic candidate we've had?)
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Gentlemen, so far I'm unmoved. Who's the anti-papist of the lot? Well, Greely was a Universalist, and the Prohibition Party leaders were protestants and founders of the Good Templars, which
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
I know that later on, a lot of pro-prohibition rhetoric would be couched in anti-Catholic terms, with lots of bashing of Irish-Americans for being drunkards. I don't know if that particular line of rhetoric has developed at this point in history, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Corek posted:Definitely not Charles O'Conor (who I believe is the first Catholic candidate we've had?) First openly Catholic candidate. John Floyd was likely a secret convert around 1832. Nebakenezzer posted:Gentlemen, so far I'm unmoved. Who's the anti-papist of the lot? Grant sympathized with the Know-Nothing Movement back in the 1850s and supported the Blaine Amendment, which was written to destroy America's nascent Catholic school system. Because Catholics tended to settle in cities, which were led by Democrats, Republicans historically tended to be more anti-Catholic than their opponents. The Prohibition Party probably carries around anti-Catholic baggage. Black and his supporters are inspired by radical forms of Protestant Christianity, which tended to see Catholics as partly responsible for the country's growing alcoholism. Whereas other parties would try to ban their immigration though, Black would probably try to convert them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
The major problem I have with the Prohibition Party isn’t that they want prohibition of alcohol, it’s that they’ve made it the central issue of their campaign. It’s like if there were a GMO‐Free Party today. Railing against GMOs isn’t itself a dealbreaker, but what’s wrong with these people that they look at America and decide that that is the № 1 problem? I think the Prohibition Party truly believed that if they cleaned the country of alcohol, they’d solve many other social problems at the same time, and that’s simply not true. It’s almost as bad as claiming ridding America of GMOs would do the same today.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
I disagree that alcohol prohibition is as fanciful as GMO opposition, personally. It is really easy underestimate how much these ancient dudes drank. The scale of alcohol use in the 19th century actually took a pretty massive public health toll. The very concept of "alcoholism" probably hadn't even really been invented yet, and early feminist activists were a pretty easy coalition-- they associated alcohol abuse with spousal and child abuse, as well as workplace accidents and fights, for instance. Ethanol is a p nasty drug all things considered. Considering that the early prohibitionists here are incrementalists, and compared to GMOs, which basically do nothing, we're on a completely different level.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Octatonic posted:I disagree that alcohol prohibition is as fanciful as GMO opposition, personally. It is really easy underestimate how much these ancient dudes drank. The scale of alcohol use in the 19th century actually took a pretty massive public health toll. The very concept of "alcoholism" probably hadn't even really been invented yet, and early feminist activists were a pretty easy coalition-- they associated alcohol abuse with spousal and child abuse, as well as workplace accidents and fights, for instance. Ethanol is a p nasty drug all things considered. It sounds like they are trying to do to alcohol what people today are trying to do to smoking - slowly squeeze it out by increased taxation and increased regulation because there is a huge and manifest health cost. Which is not an unreasonable position, especially as alcohol fueled violence is not a new thing. Stats are hard to find, but the best I can see is that US alcohol consumption in the 1800s was TWENTY SEVEN POINT FIVE liters of pure ethanol per person, which is god drat bananas. That is almost twice what the Russians drink today. TWICE. No wonder people had a problem about drinking, holy poo poo. That's 4 cans of Coors Original beer a day for every man, woman and child. You've got to guess some people weren't drinking that much, so a large chunk of the population had to be having like 8 beers a day. Every god drat day. Cthulhu Dreams has issued a correction as of 02:42 on Apr 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Alcohol had a reputation as healthier than plain water, especially in urban areas before proper sanitation cleaned up the drinking water sources. It's not quite as bad as some rumors that pre-20th century people almost exclusively drank alcohol at every meal and during the working day because every water source was putrid and foul.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
To quote an Englishman visiting America in the 1830's...quote:"They say that the English cannot settle any thing properly, without a dinner. I am sure the Americans can fix nothing, without a drink. If you meet, you drink; if you part, you drink; if you make acquaintance, you drink; if you close a bargain you drink; they quarrel in their drink, and they make it up with a drink. They drink, because it is hot; they drink because it is cold. If successful in elections, they drink and rejoice; if not, they drink and swear; they begin to drink early in the morning, they leave off late at night; they commence it early in https://ia600501.us.archive.org/6/items/diaryinamericase23138gut/23138-8.txt Edit: Unrealted but... quote:To prove how fond the Americans are of anything that excites them, I will mention a representation which I one day went to see--that of the "Infernal Regions." There were two or three of these shewn in the different cities in the States. Nckdictator has issued a correction as of 05:08 on Apr 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Alcohol had a reputation as healthier than plain water, especially in urban areas before proper sanitation cleaned up the drinking water sources. It's not quite as bad as some rumors that pre-20th century people almost exclusively drank alcohol at every meal and during the working day because every water source was putrid and foul. The same stats - from the early 1800s, have the UK at ~14 litres a year, and Australia at ~21ish litres. This stupid journal article won't let me cut/paste from the PDF. This is normalised to today's population/gender mix to be comparable to modern figures, was lower in absolute terms. Australian drinking then went on to slump by half by 1890. Nckdictator posted:To quote an Englishman visiting America in the 1830's... This owns. Cthulhu Dreams has issued a correction as of 03:05 on Apr 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
In 1896, the "broad gaugers" of the Prohibition Party who wanted a full party platform split from the "narrow gaugers" who wanted a single plank endorsing Prohibition. The narrow gaugers got 10 times the vote of the broad gaugers in the election, despite being this thread's choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Nckdictator posted:To quote an Englishman visiting America in the 1830's... this is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:The major problem I have with the Prohibition Party isn’t that they want prohibition of alcohol, it’s that they’ve made it the central issue of their campaign. Single-issue parties are a time-honored tradition. It's hard to find a bunch of things at once that both aren't being addressed by either mainstream party, but it's very easy to find a single issue to rally people around. We've already seen the anti-masonic party and the Free Soil Party, and ostensibly the Republican party started out as one. In the modern day, you still hear about things like UKIP, which is focused on making Britain exit the EU and The Rent Is Too High Party, which is self explanatory. Prohibition is a way more valuable issue than GMOs though. It'll affect way more people. Before it goes nationwide, there will be entire states going dry. It wasn't nearly on the same level as slavery, but you can see some parallels in the two issues. Grant himself had problems with alcohol, although they had mostly cleared up by the time he became president.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Grant is great in theory but we have now seen how he works in practice. Based on what we have seen of his supreme incompetence so far, how can anyone in good conscience vote for the man a second time? Grant is a lovely option. He is somehow the least lovely of the options.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2016 05:43
|
|
