Where in the world did you hear this nonsense?
Armed black people were not a threat in the old south. You know why? Because if one black person had pointed a gun in the general direction of a white person, the white people would have lynched him. And then lynched a few dozen other black people as a warning about getting uppity.
No, that is the falsehood that has been spread making Black Americans into perennial helpless victims. The reality is that there was armed resistance and self-defense for decades.
It is very convenient for white liberals to believe that since they ignored the plight of the southern black for 90 years, he was not defending himself.
Where are you getting your information about Blacks not using guns for self-defense in the South? The Klan was a powerful but not omnipotent force in the South only because Blacks took up arms.The violence perpetrated against them would have been much much worse. Who/what do you think kept the violent attackers from committing genocide in the decades after Reconstruction?
I had an education.
Here. Learn something.
That’s just bizarre: you link a story that starts with a recounting of a black man in 1960, during the civil rights era defending himself to prove black men were armed (you said “90 years”) in 1870 I guess? Late 50’s, early 60’s is when white liberals were getting murdered for helping with civil rights protests, yet were ignoring them somehow. What are you on about?
What is your point? You claimed that blacks wouldn’t dare point a gun at whites lest they get lynched. The article I posted has example after example of blacks doing just that from the end of the Civil War up until the CRM.
You link to a paper on the racist origins of gun laws, a concept which was mentioned in my article, and claim you have “an education”. I did too. I learned about the history of black resistance as I matriculated at an HBCU. The idea that blacks were hopeless until whitey turned their eye to them in the 60s would not only be insulting, but wrong.
So yes. Blacks were heavily armed in the decades between CW and CRM. And yes it caused problems for the white establishment, which is why some promoted restrictive gun laws
Read further, it won’t hurt. I promise.
I love it how quickly it changed from “How do we get Trump out when he loses?” to “There’ll be riots if he wins”.
The not-so-thinly-veiled threat of violence (no by the OP, of course) if the election is not the prefered result, is the least democratic thing you can do. Especially if you make the people who respond to the violence the bad guys.
You’re feeling Biden’s chances slip by. Trump will win by a bigger margin than 2016 and you know it.
If Trump wins, all of those acting cabinet posts would continue to be acting posts; he’d just say “fuck the Senate’s advice and consent” and dare someone to stop him. He’d fire more career civil servants - who knows, he’d probably use the OPM to go from agency to agency, employee to employee, and look at voting records and social media posts to see who’s loyal enough to keep their jobs and who isn’t - everyone would get their own special vetting and clearance. Others who aren’t directly investigated catch wind of what’s going on, and career civil servants begin to leave the federal government in droves, expecting that they’ll be the next to get a blemish on their CV. The federal government would be tilted heavily toward pro-Trump loyalists, similar to what Recep Erdogan has done in Turkey and what Putin has done in Russia. The federal government in, say, 2022 would look quite different than it did in December 2016. The DoJ would belong to Trump and the GOP. Homeland Security would belong to Trump and the GOP. So would a lot of other agencies.
The whole history so far is that Trump got a slight bounce from his dystopian convention, that bump is the one that is fading.
The article goes to point that states polls were coming, while Pennsylvania may fade for Biden other battleground state polls show a huge drop for Trump.
convention, and they are consistent with the tale told by post-convention national polls: The RNC hasn’t boosted President Trump enough to meaningfully improve his odds of winning the election. In fact, the state polls we’ve gotten this week have been pretty darn good for Joe Biden — with one big exception that we’ll get to in a minute.
Probably the most eye-opening state poll was Fox News’s survey1 of Arizona , which gave Biden a healthy 9-percentage-point lead. The poll was taken in the immediate wake of the RNC, and although candidates generally poll higher right after their conventions, Fox found Trump in a worse position compared with its previous poll
With Arizona’s Republican Senator McSally being 17 points under the Democratic “dancing”* astronaut for the senate. 
*Supporters of McSally made an ad having a dancing astronaut to make fun of Kelly, it has backfired because some are impressed by “Kelly’s” moves.
If Biden wins, will you come back and apologize for this ridiculous bit of faux-mind-reading?
Donald? Is that you?
Definitely
Covfefe
If Trump wins, will you come back and congratulate me for my marvellous foresight?
It will be foresight alright, but not marvelous.
The fact remains that all the rioting is happening while Trump is president, there were many that did foresee how disastrous these 4 years had been, I did foresee 4 years ago that thanks to graft and unnecessary moves that were gonna get him into legal trouble that the American taxpayers would be the ones left with the hefty bill.
What I did not foresee is that Trump would be willing to have Americans die to get that graft and make those stupid wasteful moves also.
Ok, mid-tier foresight.
With Democratic mayors and DAs those who respond to the burning and looting are the de facto bad guys.
Since we do have a president that declared to not have any responsibility, it is rich to claim that we should give him 4 more years so he will become responsible…
I don’t see Trump out burning and looting. I see far left radicals and low class criminal opportunists doing that. All under the protection of local leaders.