Does anyone not see the connection??????????????

[Mr Dixon]

Does anyone not see the connection??????????????
President Andrew Jackson, aka “Old Hickory,” campaigned as the embodiment of the backwoodsman “cracker” spirit, as his critics put it, even though by the time he was elected he’d become a slave-owning planter just like the wealthy elites who had bamboozled or bullied so many freeholders out of their small plots. He lacked “statesmanlike qualities” and he failed even to defend his lower-class constituency from the depredations of the upper crust. But the fact that “Jackson did not look or act like a conventional politician,” Isenberg writes, “was a fundamental part of his appeal.” He was boastful and overbearing, not “a government minion or a pampered courtier,” an outsider who promised to clean up Washington corruption by the bluntest methods available. As one of his enemies wrote, “boisterous in ordinary conversation, he makes up in oaths what he lacks in arguments.” A ruthless and successful general, Jackson was “quick to resent any who disagreed with him,” and eschewed reasoned debate in favor of challenging his opponents to duels.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2016/06/white_trash_the_400_year_untold_history_of_class_in_america_by_nancy_isenberg.html

[lapfog_1]

1. The Donald would wet himself from his tiny tiny penis

if anyone ever challenged him to a duel.

In that he is much different than Andrew Jackson

[Sculpin Beauregard]

2. Yes, they (the Gangrenous Old Pricks) used and are using every odious playbook

from days gone by in order to get/maintain power.

That matters much less than the fact that a foreign, hostile government aided Dump to get power. That is an ACT OF WAR, with all the repercussions to subsequent removal from power that this implies.

[kentuck]

3. In my reading, this changed the way people looked at their government.

And was the birth of the Democratic Party. The people never assumed as much power until Jackson, with all his faults.