Democrats delay change to convention superdelegates

[Exotica]

73. The party of Lincoln? Yeah, that was racist too

https://timeline.com/party-of-lincoln-racist-23cb27089dc

In his continuing (and perhaps increasingly desperate) bid to win over black voters, Donald Trump — and many other Republicans — have been framing the Republican party as “the party of Abraham Lincoln” in recent weeks.

It’s ironic that Trump is now repeating the same talking point that anti-Trump Republicans have used for months to distance Trump’s bigotry from the apparently anti-racist GOP. “This is the party of Lincoln,” House Speaker Paul Ryan told CNN in May.

“Our party was founded to defeat slavery. Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president, signed the Emancipation Proclamation,” proclaimed Ted Cruz, in his less-than, non-endorsement of Trump at the RNC. It’s become a rallying cry for a party desperate to claim black voters and reclaim moderate voters.

As a thumbnail indicator, the phrase “party of Lincoln” in The New York Times spiked to an all-time high in 2016. (The previous spike was in 1964, when Barry Goldwater was the Republican nominee.) But what if the original Party of Lincoln was not at all, in fact, the Party of Lincoln — at least in the way many Americans would recognize?

Despite going down in history as the president who emancipated slaves from bondage, Lincoln — and his party — were not “staunch” advocates of black freedom and civil rights. But don’t tell that to Trump and anti-Trump Republicans of 2016 vying for black voters.


snip