Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

DFW

(60,423 posts)
Wed May 3, 2017, 04:32 AM May 2017

This is probably worth a poll, but I'm just tossing the question out there [View all]

From Raw Story today: (maybe yesterday in the States):

"The president claimed that President Andrew Jackson was very angry about the Civil War and could have prevented it, even though Jackson died 16 years prior."

I see three possibilities here:

1.) Trump has no more knowledge of US history than he does about Chinese calligraphy.

2.) Trump does know US history, but prefers making up his own version to suit his mood

3.) Trump thinks Abraham Lincoln's real name was Andrew Jackson, and won't be persuaded otherwise without a birth certificate.

How far off the deep end does this nut case have to go before someone in his own party is willing to admit publicly that he is getting a little wet?

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This is probably worth a ...