Trump's imaginary history

[Winston]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

You are mistaken. The South Carolina secession movement was a direct response to the 1828 Tariff of Abomination. The first talk of secession was from Virginia, in response to the Alien and Sedition act of 1798. Then there was the Hartford Convention during the War of 1812, New England states threatening to secede. Jackson did stop the secession of South Carolina, by threat of force, and it cost him his Vice President.

 

[TNHarley]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

You are mistaken. The South Carolina secession movement was a direct response to the 1828 Tariff of Abomination. The first talk of secession was from Virginia, in response to the Alien and Sedition act of 1798. Then there was the Hartford Convention during the War of 1812, New England states threatening to secede. Jackson did stop the secession of South Carolina, by threat of force, and it cost him his Vice President.

talked about it for decades - before the civil war

 

[Winston]

Righwinger's command of the language dwarfs that of meathead.

The point is that Trump really had no grasp of Jackson's presidency and did not really know where he fit in during the first half of the 19th century American history.

Since Jackson was pro slavery, anti First Peoples, and wanted Texas and California in the Union, the CW would have come despite him living a bit later. His unionism would not have been strong enough to counter the much stronger growth of secessionism later in the 1850s.

I am no Trump fan. I believe he is an idiot. But in this case, well some people are making mountains out of molehills and, ironically, displaying an amazing ignorance of American History themselves.

"Had Jackson been later"--as in, had Jackson been president in the 1840's, or most certainly, the 1850's, perhaps there would have been no Civil War. And it is not as if Jackson would have negotiated a compromise, it is just Jackson would have hung the early secessionists from oak trees on their farms.

Let's check out some quotes. First, Andrew Jackson, in response to South Carolina.

But each State having expressly parted with so many powers as to constitute jointly with the other States a single nation, cannot from that period possess any right to secede, because such secession does not break a league, but destroys the unity of a nation, and any injury to that unity is not only a breach which would result from the contravention of a compact, but it is an offense against the whole Union. [emphasis added] To say that any State may at pleasure secede from the Union, is to say that the United States are not a nation because it would be a solecism to contend that any part of a nation might dissolve its connection with the other parts, to their injury or ruin, without committing any offense. Secession, like any other revolutionary act, may be morally justified by the extremity of oppression; but to call it a constitutional right, is confounding the meaning of terms, and can only be done through gross error, or to deceive those who are willing to assert a right, but would pause before they made a revolution, or incur the penalties consequent upon a failure.

Now, let's go to James Buchanan, twenty eight years later, his last State of the Union Address.

In order to justify secession as a constitutional remedy, it must be on the principle that the Federal Government is a merebility whenever any sudden excitement might impel them to such a course. By this process a Union might be entirely broken into fragments in a few weeks which cost our forefathers many years of toil, privation, and blood to establish. voluntary association of States, to be dissolved at pleasure by any one of the contracting parties. If this be so, the Confederacy [here referring to the existing Union] is a rope of sand, to be penetrated and dissolved by the first adverse wave of public opinion in any of the States. In this manner our thirty-three States may resolve themselves into as many petty, jarring, and hostile republics, each one retiring from the Union without responsibility whenever any sudden excitement might impel them to such a course. By this process a Union might be entirely broken into fragments in a few weeks which cost our forefathers many years of toil, privation, and blood to establish.

Not very difficult to construct an argument that Trump was exactly right. Jackson was against the right of secession exempt in extreme circumstances. Buchanan, although correct about the ramifications of secession, exhibited an almost lackadaisical attitude towards it and appeared to accept it as a "constitutional remedy".

And irony appears everywhere here. The slavery issue is a red herring and Jackson predicted that the secession of the south was all about an independent Southern Confederacy that, while using the issue of tariffs during his administration, would later use the issue of slavery to sever the South's ties to the Union.

 

[JakeStarkey]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

 

[Winston]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

You are mistaken. The South Carolina secession movement was a direct response to the 1828 Tariff of Abomination. The first talk of secession was from Virginia, in response to the Alien and Sedition act of 1798. Then there was the Hartford Convention during the War of 1812, New England states threatening to secede. Jackson did stop the secession of South Carolina, by threat of force, and it cost him his Vice President.

talked about it for decades - before the civil war

Yes, South Carolina talked about it for decades prior to the Civil War, but not decades prior to Andrew Jackson's tenure. In fact, they talked a little about it right at the beginning of Jackson's first term,, Jackson bitch slapped them, and they pretty much kept their mouths shut about it till after Jackson left office.

 

[TNHarley]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

You are mistaken. The South Carolina secession movement was a direct response to the 1828 Tariff of Abomination. The first talk of secession was from Virginia, in response to the Alien and Sedition act of 1798. Then there was the Hartford Convention during the War of 1812, New England states threatening to secede. Jackson did stop the secession of South Carolina, by threat of force, and it cost him his Vice President.

talked about it for decades - before the civil war

Yes, South Carolina talked about it for decades prior to the Civil War, but not decades prior to Andrew Jackson's tenure. In fact, they talked a little about it right at the beginning of Jackson's first term,, Jackson bitch slapped them, and they pretty much kept their mouths shut about it till after Jackson left office.

yep. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough in my original statement. I get why you called me out.

 

[Winston]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

The "issue" was over rather a state, or a collection of states, could secede. Jackson, as president, was opposed to secession. What part of "cannot, from that period, possess any right to secede" do you not understand?

 

[Slade3200]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

The "issue" was over rather a state, or a collection of states, could secede. Jackson, as president, was opposed to secession. What part of "cannot, from that period, possess any right to secede" do you not understand?

Can you imagine if Trump took that tone with California about the succession talks following the election?

 

[JakeStarkey]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

The "issue" was over rather a state, or a collection of states, could secede. Jackson, as president, was opposed to secession. What part of "cannot, from that period, possess any right to secede" do you not understand?

What part of do you understand that 1832 was not 1855 or later. Jackson would have moved to protect slavery from federal interference, and if that meant secession, he would have Seceder Andy.

 

[Winston]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

The "issue" was over rather a state, or a collection of states, could secede. Jackson, as president, was opposed to secession. What part of "cannot, from that period, possess any right to secede" do you not understand?

Can you imagine if Trump took that tone with California about the succession talks following the election?

Well, "talk" is all that was and it did not deserve a response. But, Trump may very well be tested by California in response to sanctuary cities. California has contemplated refusing to remit federal funds in response to the freezing of funding to sanctuary cities. See, one can "talk" about secession all they want. But when one refuses to send the Feds their money, things can get ugly in a hurry.

 

[rightwinger]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

The "issue" was over rather a state, or a collection of states, could secede. Jackson, as president, was opposed to secession. What part of "cannot, from that period, possess any right to secede" do you not understand?

If push came to shove....what side would Jackson choose?

 

[JakeStarkey]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

The "issue" was over rather a state, or a collection of states, could secede. Jackson, as president, was opposed to secession. What part of "cannot, from that period, possess any right to secede" do you not understand?

If push came to shove....what side would Jackson choose?

If it were white supremacy and the suppression of black slaves, it is no brainer.

 

[Winston]

By the later 1850s the issue was over slavery, and Jackson would have backed the South.

The "issue" was over rather a state, or a collection of states, could secede. Jackson, as president, was opposed to secession. What part of "cannot, from that period, possess any right to secede" do you not understand?

If push came to shove....what side would Jackson choose?

If it were white supremacy and the suppression of black slaves, it is no brainer.

I have had a laborious task here; but nullification is dead, and its actors and courtiers will only be remembered by the people to be execrated for their wicked designs to sever and destroy the only good government on the globe, and that prosperity and happiness we enjoy over every other portion of the world. Haman's gallows ought to be the fate of all such ambitious men, who would involve the country in civil war, and all the evils in its train, that they might reign and ride on its whirlwinds, and direct the storm. The free people of these United States have spoken, and consigned these demagogues to their proper doom. Take care of your nullifiers you have amongst you. Let them meet the indignant frowns of every man who loves his country. The tariff, it is now known, was a mere pretext. Its burthen was on your coarse woolens---by the law of July, 1832, coarse woolen was reduced to five per cent. for the benefit of the South. Mr. Clay's bill takes it up and classes it with woolens at 50 per cent., reduces it gradually down to 20 per cent., and there it is to remain, and Mr. Calhoun and all the nullifiers agree to the principle. The cash duties and home valuation will be equal to 15 per cent. more, and after the year 1842, you pay on coarse woolens 35 per cent. If this is not protection, I cannot understand. Therefore the tariff was only the pretext, and disunion and a Southern confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro, or slavery, question.

President Andrew Jackson on Secession and Nullification

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yep, and if he had been alive in 1860, AJ would have supported secession.

 

[Billy000]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

lol oh yeah that must be it. Trump is a total history buff. How else would Jackson have been upset by the war years after his death?

 

[Billy000]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

People rate that funny, but no one wants to touch it. This is like the media crucifying him for saying that shit about china and korea.. He was right..

Lol you dumbasses will defend Trump no matter what he says. Had Hillary said exactly this, you wouldnt stop whining about it.

 

[TNHarley]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

People rate that funny, but no one wants to touch it. This is like the media crucifying him for saying that shit about china and korea.. He was right..

Lol you dumbasses will defend Trump no matter what he says. Had Hillary said exactly this, you wouldnt stop whining about it.

You hate it, doncha?

 

[Billy000]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

People rate that funny, but no one wants to touch it. This is like the media crucifying him for saying that shit about china and korea.. He was right..

Lol you dumbasses will defend Trump no matter what he says. Had Hillary said exactly this, you wouldnt stop whining about it.

You hate it, doncha?

Nah, I just feel sorry for you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Trump is a dumbass when it comes to history. Almost all of the far and alt right and libertarian wings are idiots when it comes to history.

 

[TNHarley]

Andrew Jackson stopped secession when he came into office. SC had talked about it for decades.
If im not mistaken, his efforts lead way to the compromise of 1850.
Probably what he was talking about..

People rate that funny, but no one wants to touch it. This is like the media crucifying him for saying that shit about china and korea.. He was right..

Lol you dumbasses will defend Trump no matter what he says. Had Hillary said exactly this, you wouldnt stop whining about it.

You hate it, doncha?

Nah, I just feel sorry for you.

For applying context to history?
I mean, his terminology us shit but he was right