Hillary backs Tubman on $20

[bobloblaw]

Ill stick with Jackson

[bobloblaw]

So she has a position on which woman should be on the $20, but can't say her position on TPP? Pathetic.

I wish I had a $100 prize to give you.

[7,052,770]

I think we should put Jonas Salk on the $20. He saved more lives in America and around the world than Harriet Tubman, any president or any "liberating" military intervention this country has ever embarked on.

It would help refute the stereotype the rest of the world has of us as a country that isn't interested in science or in "book learnin'" in general.

Norman Borlaug would also be a great choice.

[7,052,770]

The Reaganfans are going to be really upset if this happens.

[publicunofficial]

Great issue to push, will cause countless conservatives to say terrible things.

I can see it now. Huckabee defending the Trail of Tears, Trump calling Harriet Tubman ugly, countless Republicans saying Reagan deserves it more thereby completely missing the point. Glorious.

[Ebsy]

Great issue to push, will cause countless conservatives to say terrible things.

I can see it now. Huckabee defending the Trail of Tears, Trump calling Harriet Tubman ugly, countless Republicans saying Reagan deserves it more thereby completely missing the point. Glorious.

When will you be back to collect your laurels?

[SWE]

Great issue to push, will cause countless conservatives to say terrible things.

I can see it now. Huckabee defending the Trail of Tears, Trump calling Harriet Tubman ugly, countless Republicans saying Reagan deserves it more thereby completely missing the point. Glorious.

Yes, the debate over this will certainly be hilarious

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Jackson was the founder of her party though...

[Ebsy]

Jackson was the founder of her party though...

Lincoln was the first President from the Republican party, but the current GOP could hardly care about him, so...

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Such an important issue <Sarcasm>

Representation matters, pricks.

[WVdemocrat]

This will not be in a debate...

Don't be so sure. There was a debate even about whether or not MLK day should be a national holiday. Reagan opposed it.

Great issue to push, will cause countless conservatives to say terrible things.

I can see it now. Huckabee defending the Trail of Tears, Trump calling Harriet Tubman ugly, countless Republicans saying Reagan deserves it more thereby completely missing the point. Glorious.

It would be glorious if because Hillary came out in support of it, they felt compelled to oppose it. That would just be amazing.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The thing is, the Republican Party was different back in the day. Back then, the Democratic Party was full of racist Dixiecrats. For example, much more Republicans supported the Civil Rights Act than Democrats. To be honest, I might have supported the Republican Party back then too, while disagreeing with them on economic policy.

There was a piece in the economics which shwed on economic policy the GOP were far more Conservative on Economic Issues and the Dems were more Southern

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Politicians shouldn't be on money anyway.

[Simfan34]

Oh, we're not actually going to do this, are we? And if we are we're going to put Eleanor Roosevelt on it, right?

Please, explain your opposition to this.

It's just so... different. And the mockup they used was just... bad. All just too weird.

Oh we're not actually going to do this are we? And if we are we're going to put Eleanor Roosevelt on it, right?

I'm surprised your preferred option isn't to put the queen on our money and rejoin the British commonwealth

This would be preferable, yes.

[bobloblaw]

Jackson was the founder of her party though...

Lincoln was the first President from the Republican party, but the current GOP could hardly care about him, so...

Which why the GOP still has Lincoln Day Dinner. It is the Dem party in its pandering to minorities that wants to dump the founder of the modern day Dem party a guy who stood against banks and for the little man.

The dumping of Jackson is all you need to know about today's Dem party. Elitist, coastal, anti-American history and culture. They should suggest Rigoberta Menchu for ther $20.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Jackson was the founder of her party though...

Lincoln was the first President from the Republican party, but the current GOP could hardly care about him, so...

Which why the GOP still has Lincoln Day Dinner. (except a whole bunch of republican organisations have changed it to "reagan day dinner" *gag*) It is the Dem party in its pandering to minorities (how dare they!? obviously minorities deserve no attention whatsoever) that wants to dump the founder of the modern day (1820s is basically modern day, right?) Dem party a guy who stood against banks (except for ones run by his cronies, he fckin' loved those) and for the little  man (as long as he was white, anyway. but that's the only kind of person who matters, right?).

The dumping of Jackson is all you need to know about today's Dem party. Elitist (unlike mitt "47%" romney), coastal (like over 60% of the u.s. population), anti-American history and culture (america has never done anything bad, ever! if you disagree you are clearly anti-american). They should suggest Rigoberta Menchu (an unabashedly anti-elitist freedom fighter) for ther $20.

a good post.

p.s.: bobloblaw, andrew jackson committed actual, literal genocide. no doubt if democrats were singing his praises you would be comparing them to nazis.

[Beet]

I think we should put Jonas Salk on the $20. He saved more lives in America and around the world than Harriet Tubman, any president or any "liberating" military intervention this country has ever embarked on.

It would help refute the stereotype the rest of the world has of us as a country that isn't interested in science or in "book learnin'" in general.

I sort of agree with this, but maintain that a debate over who is on the 20 dollar Bill is stupid. If it's trending on Twitter or whatever, that just shows the state of contemporary political debate is in the gutter. Jackson's just a guy with big hair to most people. In 20 years, cash will be obsolete anyways.

[bobloblaw]

Jackson was the founder of her party though...

Lincoln was the first President from the Republican party, but the current GOP could hardly care about him, so...

Which why the GOP still has Lincoln Day Dinner. (except a whole bunch of republican organisations have changed it to "reagan day dinner" *gag*) It is the Dem party in its pandering to minorities (how dare they!? obviously minorities deserve no attention whatsoever) that wants to dump the founder of the modern day (1820s is basically modern day, right?) Dem party a guy who stood against banks (except for ones run by his cronies, he fckin' loved those) and for the little  man (as long as he was white, anyway. but that's the only kind of person who matters, right?).

The dumping of Jackson is all you need to know about today's Dem party. Elitist (unlike mitt "47%" romney), coastal (like over 60% of the u.s. population), anti-American history and culture (america has never done anything bad, ever! if you disagree you are clearly anti-american). They should suggest Rigoberta Menchu (an unabashedly anti-elitist freedom fighter) for ther $20.

a good post.

p.s.: bobloblaw, andrew jackson committed actual, literal genocide. no doubt if democrats were singing his praises you would be comparing them to nazis.

A poster above correctly noted LBJ. The worst war criminal in US History

[AelroseB]

Such an important issue <Sarcasm>

Representation matters, pricks.

I'll take merit above quotas any day.

[SWE]

Such an important issue <Sarcasm>

Representation matters, pricks.

I'll take merit above quotas any day.

TIL Tubman doesn't have merit

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Jackson was the founder of her party though...

Lincoln was the first President from the Republican party, but the current GOP could hardly care about him, so...

Which why the GOP still has Lincoln Day Dinner. (except a whole bunch of republican organisations have changed it to "reagan day dinner" *gag*) It is the Dem party in its pandering to minorities (how dare they!? obviously minorities deserve no attention whatsoever) that wants to dump the founder of the modern day (1820s is basically modern day, right?) Dem party a guy who stood against banks (except for ones run by his cronies, he fckin' loved those) and for the little  man (as long as he was white, anyway. but that's the only kind of person who matters, right?).

The dumping of Jackson is all you need to know about today's Dem party. Elitist (unlike mitt "47%" romney), coastal (like over 60% of the u.s. population), anti-American history and culture (america has never done anything bad, ever! if you disagree you are clearly anti-american). They should suggest Rigoberta Menchu (an unabashedly anti-elitist freedom fighter) for ther $20.

a good post.

p.s.: bobloblaw, andrew jackson committed actual, literal genocide. no doubt if democrats were singing his praises you would be comparing them to nazis.

Ok, and as I said before, LBJ killed 50x more people, and his legacy is still celebrated by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. You aren't really fooling anyone by calling one a genocide and trying to skirt over the other and blame it on Nixon, somehow.

i never mentioned lbj? and the "but this one other guy was worse" deflection is bullsht anyway.

and, it's not even really accurate. lbj killed more people because there were more people. vietnam lost roughly 2-3% of its population while the native americans lost in the neighborhood of 20-25%, and their homeland. vietnam was a horrible, criminal war, but it wasn't a genocide.

[Beet]

To be fair, the entire European colonization of the New World from 1492 until 1890 has shades of genocide by that standard. Yes, Jackson was a prominent participant in it, but I've never seen an argument that he was a decisive historical actor in that regard.

[RINO Tom]

So many dumb posts in this thread that it makes my head hurt (and I'm uncharacteristically hungover today, so it's especially painful).  I'll drop two comments:

1. NO local GOP chapter has dropped Lincoln from the annual dinner's name, and I've never seen one that isn't called the Lincoln-Reagan dinner.  So let's stop with that narrative.  Southerners generally don't like Lincoln as much as the rest of the country, and that was the case when they mostly voted Democrat, too.  It's hardly a trait that inherently relates to Republicanism.

2. This is a great idea.  Not shockingly, bolboblow, or whatever the hell his name is, would rather have the racist founder of the Democratic Party on the bill than an iconic Republican who fought slavery...

[bobloblaw]

So many dumb posts in this thread that it makes my head hurt (and I'm uncharacteristically hungover today, so it's especially painful).  I'll drop two comments:

1. NO local GOP chapter has dropped Lincoln from the annual dinner's name, and I've never seen one that isn't called the Lincoln-Reagan dinner.  So let's stop with that narrative.  Southerners generally don't like Lincoln as much as the rest of the country, and that was the case when they mostly voted Democrat, too.  It's hardly a trait that inherently relates to Republicanism.

2. This is a great idea.  Not shockingly, bolboblow, or whatever the hell his name is, would rather have the racist founder of the Democratic Party on the bill than an iconic Republican who fought slavery...

Lincoln is already on a bill.

[Rockefeller GOP]

So many dumb posts in this thread that it makes my head hurt (and I'm uncharacteristically hungover today, so it's especially painful).  I'll drop two comments:

1. NO local GOP chapter has dropped Lincoln from the annual dinner's name, and I've never seen one that isn't called the Lincoln-Reagan dinner.  So let's stop with that narrative.  Southerners generally don't like Lincoln as much as the rest of the country, and that was the case when they mostly voted Democrat, too.  It's hardly a trait that inherently relates to Republicanism.

2. This is a great idea.  Not shockingly, bolboblow, or whatever the hell his name is, would rather have the racist founder of the Democratic Party on the bill than an iconic Republican who fought slavery...

Lincoln is already on a bill.

Yeah, that's ONE iconic Republican who fought slavery.  Tubman was another.

I'd really like to hear why you prefer Andrew Jackson over Harriet Tubman, LOL.