Trump Says Civil War Could Have Been 'Negotiated' in Bizarre Iowa Speech - eviltoast
Donald Trump held rallies in Newton and Clinton, Iowa on Saturday on the anniversary of Jan. 6 and nine days before the state's Republican caucus.

Donald Trump continued his push on Saturday to win the Republican presidential nomination with a pair of caucus rallies in Iowa, beginning at the DMACC Conference Center in Newton and then culminating in Clinton. His speeches come on the third anniversary of Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and a little more than a week before the Republican Iowa caucus commences on Jan. 15.

As for commemorating the solemn anniversary of Jan. 6, Trump lauded the insurrectionists, while labeling some immigrants as “terrorists” and prisoners and gang members. “And terrorists are coming in also. What they’re doing to our country is not — it’s it’s, when you talk about insurrection, what they’re doing? That’s the real deal. That the real deal — not patriotically and peacefully, peacefully and patriotically” he said, contrasting those who rioted as “peaceful” and “patriotic” against immigrants, who the four-time indicted former president continually paints as criminals.

…

“I’m so attracted to seeing it,” Trump said. “So many mistakes were made. See, there was something I think could have been negotiated to be honest with you. … I was reading something and I said, ‘This is something that could have been negotiated … that was a that was a tough one for our country… If you negotiated it, you probably wouldn’t even know who Abraham Lincoln was … but that would have been OK.”

  • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
    232·
    10 months ago

    Maybe take a break, pal, that tone is unnecessary.

    I just did some quick homework, and it looks like my public education has failed me again. That Lincoln wasn’t going to abolish slavery isn’t a shock, but I was taught that the Republicans were abolitionists, when it looks like it’s actually the case that the Republicans wanted to moderate and contain slavery*. Which makes the South’s defcon 5 shit fit about it that much funnier.

    *There are a lot of people online talking about how the party was abolitionist, but none that provide sources, so that point is going to take more homework than I’m willing to commit to confirm or deny.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      14·
      10 months ago

      The Republicans were an abolitionist party, but the moderates (like Lincoln) believed that containing it would cause it to die out, while the radicals advocated for it to be banned immediately and outright.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        10 months ago

        The Republicans were an abolitionist party, but the moderates (like Lincoln) believed that containing it would cause it to die out

        The moderates were clearly wrong. The radicals were right. I’m glad Lincoln changed his mind.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
      53·
      10 months ago

      Maybe take a break, pal, that tone is unnecessary

      Were literally staring down a second civil war, and everyone is still believing the South’s propaganda from last time…

      So it’s pretty important that people understand why it happened last time, and they’re gonna lie about it next time too.

      It’s not a meaningless argument like is PlayStation better than Xbox.

      It’s worth being upset when 99% of the country doesn’t understand why we had a civil war

      And no matter my “tone” it’ll piss off conservatives because it’s pointing out they lied.

      And it pisses off moderates because it points out how the only other option still wasn’t actively against slavery.

      If the South hasn’t thrown a temper tantrum, it could have taken decades more for slavery to be outlawed, pushing back civil rights and everything.

      “Just do nothing and hope for the best” rarely works out