'Abraham Lincoln: Wrong on Slavery, Wrong for Us.'


What if today's campaign tactics were applied to the election of 1860?

Crazed by this Presidential race, ad bloggers Make the Logo Bigger and Jetpacks ponder this question. Here's the fruit of their labours, "paid for by Friends of Douglas."

Contemporary context gave history both personality and a face. We laughed, we cried, we wondered -- ever so briefly -- what could have been.

Indentured servitude for me? Plantation micro-management for Steve? (Well, I guess one could argue that slavery was on its way out, even without that wee shove we dubbed the Reconstruction.) Propaganda aside, just how big of a deal is an election, anyway?

by Angela Natividad    Oct-29-08   Click to Comment   
Topic: Online, Opinion, Political, Spoofs, Video   

Enjoy what you've read? Subscribe to Adrants Daily and receive the daily contents of this site each day along with free whitepapers.



Maybe that's how Lincoln won.
All that money went to The Friends of Douglas representing the Northern Democrats while Lincoln's other opponent for the Presidency was John Breckinridge for the Southern Democrats so the fool Democrats could split themselves even further than they were about to split the country.
So Lincoln could win with less than 40% of the vote.
Given that Lincoln was not then in favor of freeing slaves, he might have had fact check dot org point out the discrepancy.

Posted by: Tom Messner on October 29, 2008 5:13 PM

Hey, wait a minute. I don't micro manage! ;)

Posted by: Steve Hall on October 29, 2008 7:51 PM

Steve -- I'm sured you would've made a charming slave owner.

Tom -- LOL at factcheck-dot-com.

Posted by: Angela on October 30, 2008 8:58 AM