Locking them up... That's a clever idea The Minneapolis riots of 1967/8 caused the Jewish population of North Minneapolis to move out quickly, wonder how much intermingling there was of Jews and blacks in watts and how many of the Jews left and if a single one remains I would be shocked. The national guard in Minnesota had tanks parked in gas stations while the rioters burned and looted, the national guard did nothing. LBJ offered pandering pay yet here we are today As I was typing that you brought up the Mall of America which has a massive private security Force yet still gets overrun and has experienced criminal consequences with a evil doer throwing a child off the third floor balcony, luckily the boy survived, hopefully the evil doer is incarcerated for a long long time. In the end of the police find it more profitable to give parking tickets then to put down mob rule, how many LA riots does it take to solidify the evidence. Last month the LA Police stood down while Jews were being attacked at their synagogues on a Saturday based on mayor bass's orders, problems continue galore

It is helpful to break these states down into various categories to understand the dynamics in play. 1. Blue States - Kerry by 10, Obama by 20 states: Illinois, Connecticut, Delaware, California, and Washington 2. The Swing States: Five GOP held: Ohio, Missouri, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania (flips with Specter); Three held by Democrats: Colorado, Wisconsin and Nevada. 3. The Red State Democrats: Indiana, Arkansas, North Dakota. There was some wild talk about Dems playing for KS, but with Moran as the nominee and the environment, that was impossible. Moran got 70%. Republicans had 41 seats after the 2008 elections (specifically after Chambliss won the GA runoff), fell to 40 when Specter (trailing badly to Pat Toomey in the primary) changed parties and returned to 41 when Scott Brown won Massachusetts. Republicans had to pick up 10 seats to win the majority and that was a tall order considering the map. As it was, they won all of the states in categories two and three above, except for Colorado and Nevada, and pulled one from the blue state category with Mark Kirk in Illinois. That was enough for 47. Even if the other three flip, it is not enough to win because Joe Biden would split the tie as VP. They needed to play in some very hostile terrain to pull this off. That said, Republicans did nominate the less electable candidate in five states: CA: Fiorina NV: Angle CO: Buck DE: O'Donnell CT: McMahon Buck was not a bad candidate per se, and were it not for that tape that was exposed from the late 1990s regarding a rape prosecution, I think he might have won. However, the biggest x-factor was the collapse of the GOP bid for Governor that year, and its downstream impacts, which might have also doomed Jane Norton and it certainly did not help Ken Buck. In California, the best option was Tom Campbell, a socially liberal former Republican Congressman from the Bay Area. His chances of winning a primary in this era are frankly ridiculous, and he was not assured of winning the general election either. But he would have done better than Fiorina. In NV, Sue Lowden got tanked in part by Paul supporters who backed Angle in a quest to get revenge for Lowden kneecapping the attempts by Paul's people to steal the 2008 GOP delegates, after Romney had won a landslide in the NV caucuses. Angle certainly made it easy, but there is a reason many more accomplished Republicans like Dean Heller did not attempt to challenge Harry Reid. In CT, Linda McMahon personally funded her campaign and Rob Simmons probably would have faired better in the general election. Simmons was leading Chris Dodd and CT seemed like one of the most likely pickup opportunities until Dodd dropped out. So while bad candidates caused them to miss opportunities in 2010, the effect is overstated simply because the map did not allow for the GOP to win a majority without winning heavily Democratic states.

There were three main wings to the Tea Party: 1. Fiscal Conservatives Outraged over the bailouts and deficits (starts around 2009, but builds on dissatisfaction with Bush on spending, earmarks, Medicare Part D, NCLB etc) 2. Border hawks outraged over the support for amnesty by establishment Republicans (this dates back to 2006) 3. The anti-war Ron Paul Libertarian Movement (gains support in 2009-2012, especially with younger Republicans). While most of the tea party candidates were very religious, a lot of that was a given. The reassertion of the Christian right really manifests in 2012 with candidates like Todd Akin.

It also must be noted that while Adams came from the free state of Massachusetts and slavery was an issue burning in the background, slavery did not define the divide between the two parties. The National Republicans and later the Whigs, would enjoy substantial support from planter class in the South (at lease those somewhat interested infrastructure) and likewise the Democrats had massive support in states like Maine, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Wisconsin, all of which would later become free soil and barnburner hot beds, which would serve as a siphon that pulled Northern Jacksonian Democrats away from the party and fed them into what would become the GOP Republican Party in 1854. Both parties were divided on this issue and that is why you would see both parties split and one of them collapse during the transition from the Second to the Third Party system.

6:33 People emphasize way too much the changes in the Democratic Party (almost always on a binary regarding the Civil Rights/Slavery issue) at the expense of the myriad of other factors, in some ways they are the same or at least were the same until very recently. Democrats still did very well in the up country South and Mountain West as recently as the 1990s and 2000s, Democrats are still frequently the first to criticize the influence of wealth and power on their opposition when they are in power. Yes, their approach to gov't has shifted dramatically, but the mindset of classical liberalism was one that saw a larger government as merely being a tool to enrich the powerful at the expense of the common man, as opposed to modern liberalism seeing gov't as a tool to uplift the common man. In more recent years, the shift of the Democrats towards being an elitist and establishment operation, is perhaps the biggest diversion from Jacksonian tradition aside obviously from the civil rights issue.

They conflated the electoral college with the House Contingent Election. Jackson got a plurality win in both the popular vote and the Electoral College. However, he did not get a majority in the electoral college and so it went to a contingent election in the House and that is where Clay assisted Adams in winning to become President. In truth, this was what the founders actually kind of expected to be the norm. That their would be multiple candidates with no one winning a majority and either the electoral college, or the House would then select the winner. Its use as a failsafe in case of an electoral fluke, is how it is seen today but that was not the mindset of it back in the founding era. The idea of "democracy" was a new concept in terms of mass voting (without property restrictions), mass politics, and organized political parties with activists, conventions, and strong bases of support that push down third party bids and absorb third party movements as part of a duopoly of two parties jockeying for power. I am no fan of Jackson, but there is not enough credit given to the effect Jacksonian politics had in terms of creating the foundations of what would be our "democratic" system.

The failure of the report and the 2012 autopsy was precisely because it refused to countenance any policy changes at all (except for immigration - an issue I will come back to), at a time when the Party's base composition has shifted dramatically thanks to the culture wars of the 1990s and 2000s, yet it still carried on with an Orange County platform in a party's whose base was far more rural Kentucky. The party needed to move to the center on economics to win elections and they needed to ditch the neocons for both the sake of ideological consistency and electability. Even among the Latinos, the idea that "we just pass reform, and they will become Republicans" is a very cynical outlook that treats the whole community as a monolith and devalues the reasons why they vote Democratic beyond just the immigration issue. Number 1, Democrats would get the initial boost because Obama would take credit for signing it. Number 2, they were not going to just vote for the agenda of the Koch brothers once that is done. This failure to shift the party in a "less neoliberal" direction (and thus head off political populism by having "team normal" absorb this political energy), is what opened the door to Trumpism. The problem with "team normal" is that they mostly agree with the bipartisan consensus in DC on trade and immigration, largely because they were glued into the cesspool of donors, consultants and lobbyists that dominate that town and arguably destroyed campaigns like Romney and even McCain's. The establishment mindset and calculus has always been serve the donors, win on cultural issues. This creates the mentality that the economic platform is unchangeable, but the socio-cultural issues could be pieced in and out based on what worked and did not work in the last election. This may have worked when the base was rich suburbs and it was all about "What group of Democrats are we flipping this time?" But by the 2010s, those rich suburbs have moved heavily towards the Democrats (outside of the bible belt anyway - those within it would shift under Trump), and the party was far more rural, non-college and working class than it was in 1968 or 1980. This is why there was this constant state of revolution that describes the attitude of the base with regards to the establishment. The establishment serves the neoliberal donors, and the base is increasingly nationalist. When establishment diverges from base on "core issues", you get a populist revolution. It is worth remembering that "team normal" hated Mitt Romney. They hated him in 2008 and they hated him in 2012, because the immigration issue pissed off the donors like nothing else. Romney also was criticizing Chinese currency manipulation and in 2007 criticized bad trade deals in a debate. Romney was taking a half-hearted and inconsistent stab at a more nationalist direction for the party and the donors hated. To them, Romney was as you put it "being hijacked by these forces". When Romney lost, there was even an article about how these types hoped that the death of Romney politically would take all of these things with him to the grave. The thing is that perspective of "Romney being hijacked" means you are approaching this from a biased perspective that tends to favor idealism. If one is a realist and sees that this gulf is widening, the best path is to bridge that gap, otherwise the alternative will be team crazy and their are more base voters then there are establishment/donor aligned voters in the primary. The only reason Romney won the nomination in 2012 and came in second in 2008, was because he was the border hawk candidate. Suburban fiscal conservatives was a narrow base and not enough to win the primary on its own, even back then. Going hardline on immigration was the only path for "team normal".

That lady's laugh is medicine to my ears.

"You're trying to get us to be horny on main" 😂😂😂

Love this podcast!

Oh boy, that Singaporean rotan is BRUTAL!!!

According to Owens he was treated better in Germany than in America.

Something notable happened in the late 1970s, old Beatles songs started charting on billboard again. The Grateful Dead “the 60s” filled stadiums during the Reagan years. Even Paul McCartney had the hit song during the summer of 1980. Reagan captured this moment yes for the right in the 1950s but I would argue he left room for the 60s as well

What's with the goofy dots?!

Thanks for this, the incident seems to have been forgotten.

Ohh My God: I finally see your faces!! 😮😮 I am a big fan: I have been listening to you guys for a couple of years, and I finally see you… 😅 (It’s kinda Uncanny… but I like it: It’s like seen an old friend after a long time…) 🥺 By the way: Congrats for yout Hard Work!! Keep up with the awesome content you provide to us. 👍

White community: we don't do this to our children. Black community: 🤷🏿‍♂️

Look at your beautiful faces! You’ve been a trio of disembodied voices for years now, and this was an excellent face debut.

I've been listening to this podcast for years, since the first episode. Love seening all of you! Also loooove Kellys pictures behind her ❤❤❤

Love the video. Listening is a must but this is fun especially for mini-series or special episodes

Long time listener, first time viewer! ❤

Y’all STOP lying on ZOLA. Mary Decker is a liar and all those who acquiesce to this lying propaganda are liars.

This reminds me of the episode with Jimmy Carter talking to America. In the 70s people were on their best behavior. That would never happen today lol 24:08

I was there that day but left about 10 to 15 minutes before it went off. I was 13 and on my way back to a boarding school in New Hampshire. My fight had a stop at LaGuardia. I alway got off and I was flying TWA. I remember I had thought about missing my flight so I could get lost for a short time but I got on the plane. The pilot told us what had happened as soon as we made altitude. I remember a stewardess putting a glass of white wine in front of my and, Saying, “honey you might want this now”. I had two. At the van picking me up we’re are older students, no teachers and they made joke about the bomb and then noted I was drunk. I have no memory of any family ever calling me. I feel that no one said a word. I just went on with school. I search this at least once a year. I have likely heard all stories. A while back I found a declassified file from the Ford Library. One year I look this up and found a death bed confession from a mob hit man that said it was a mob hit and they decided they did not care about collateral damage. I have only seen this one time. I cannot yet find it. Who did it? We will probably never know for sure.

The 17th amendment was the destruction of the Republic and death of Liberty.

Just heard about this guy from Rachel Maddows show

I think if you take some life or sa a child you should not be allowed to vote but any thing else you should be allowed to.

Did you everyone that fought for black rights was a Convicted felon after that, and had their boating, right, took away, and the same thing happened in the Civil War for the ones that try the free slaves just letting you know a little history.so republicans are use to this.

I’m here because Rachel and Lawrence spoke about Lester Hunt. Fascinating.

Rachel Maddow is covering this story in the second season of her “Ultra” podcast.

Thanks for posting these on KZbin now team! Keep up the great eps

Absolutely!

Six things to note: 1-JFK was already thinking beyond the 1960 Election. He knew that if he won election, that he'd have to get Johnson's blessing, as Senate Majority Leader, on getting confirmations through The Senate. Making Johnson as Vice President would put his old friend, Mike Mansfield as Majority Leader. 2-LBJ figured that he could remake the Vice President, into a figure of real authority. He was able to make the Whip job, as a position of power. He made the job of Majority Leader as a position of power. 3-Johnson knew that it would be virtually impossible for a Southerner to be elected President. However, he thought that he might become President, through "the back door". LBJ knew how sick JFK was. Johnson also knew that 1 out of 5 Presidents die in office. 4. Johnson was also a man in a hurry. He knew that "Johnson men" usually dont live past sixty. He already had a major heart attack in 1955. Lady Bird saw the Vice Presidency as a form of "semi-retirement", from politics. 5. The LBJ-RFK feud goes back into the early 1950s. Johnson was the "Democratic Leader", who expects Senators and Staff to deter to him. Bobby Kennedy was just a staff member to the Mccarthy Committee and later to the McClellan Committee. To Johnson, both JFK and RFK work for him. LBJ gave Jack Kennedy his seat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But after The 1960 Election, JFK was the boss and LBJ reported to him. Kennedy needed Johnson to "remain happy", but didnt want it to appear that JFK had to turn to Johnson to get things done through the Congress. JFK served in Congress for 14 years. 6. LBJ created an anti-nepotism law because of RFK. Kennedy was 15 years younger than him and only got his jobs in government, because of family ties. It had mixed results. For example Members of Congress, cant put relatives to work on them as paid government employees. But, whats to prevent a member of Congress from having a family member on the staff of another Members staff or on a committee? Or have a Member of the Family, as an unpaid employee?

The Republican Party's battle cry for 1946: "Had Enough?"

Threat to democracy? 🤦‍♂️ A threat to democracy is the sabotage of the voters will. As in trying to take a candidate off of the ballots or Stretching or contorting the law uniquely in order to damage or remove a political opponent. It is a historical moment. It is the first time an administration abused power/ justice Syrian to attack and defeat their political opponent. It will be overturned. There is no chance it won’t. You shouldn’t support this sort of corruption.

Time to focus on radical climate change policies to save the planet. If we can get food prices up 200% the infrastructure will fall apart. The population would decrease by 80% in just 2 years (Bill Gates data). The poorest and illegals will destroy the infrastructure doing the dirty work. WEF inspired totalitarian gov run by the brightest billionaire families will lead the way. This will be the new utopia. First we need to increase the number of illegal migrants, that's key for our success. Go Biden, Go Soros!! The new Utopia is here! Trump only put us 4 years behind schedule, time to get to work. Reply

So these are our 2 best Presidential candidates ? Pathetic. As a republican Biden is a sad excuse, and trump is not our best, this is ridiculous.

Lovely to see your faces at last after listening to the podcast for about 3 years. None of you looked ANYTHING like what I imagined 😂 But now I know, it all makes sense👍🏼

Really cool to actually see you guys talking! Great takes on this moment. Looking forward to more content like this!

I’m not at all surprised with the verdict.

Really enjoyed this, thanks for it! Definitely a kind of added discussion I'll enjoy if you do more of them in future.

This is great, appreciate y'all!

Thank you for this!

This was great! I loved seeing your faces :)

It will be overturned on appeal because that was a sham and he will still win lol

John Oliver sent me

Democrat and riot, those two words go hand in hand.

I wish they had been successful. In 1968, he won by razor thin margins, and it was discovered that he violated the Logan Act, a felony at the time, when he communicated with the Viet Cong and told them not to engage in peace talks because when he became POTUS they'd get a better deal. The communications were intercepted by the CIA and incumbent LBJ confronted him on the phone about it. Nixon, of course, lied, and said he wouldn't do such a thing. This whole issue became overshadowed by Watergate. Nixon's foundation is trying to Whitewash this history. The theft of his first election is known as the Anna Chennault affair.

No justice????? Maybe you should watch the video of a former slave of his on how he treated his slaves. Much better than the south was treated by union soldiers

Much thanks for the discusion.