Parent Upset With Shane Beamer
- Thread starter RubbinTheRock07
- Start date
Democrats do not burn black churches and seek the return of slavery.
Republicans don't either.
Well it is shocking how much him and Vann have been ignored this season after being their best playmakers all last season. But Rattler seems to be more comfortable throwing to Stogner
Not everyone knows the history.
I literally had no idea who Jaheim Bell was or even existed before seeing clips of Cocaine Shane's presser and then this thread. Yes, they are that irrelevant.
People skip the history when it does not fit their narrative. The Dems from segregation were the republications of the 60-80s
i couldn’t get over how bad their playcalling was saturday. that’s the first time i’ve watched them closely
dude was really good last year averaging almost 17 a carry and had right at 500 yards and 5 TDS. Him and Vann were the bright spots in their offense and now barely used.
they aren’t all americans but
Vann
Stogner
Bell
Wells
Lloyd
Rattler
they should be better than they are
yeah they have enough skill talent to be better but their OL is really bad which is why I don't know why they have not given Joyner or Doty at least a try. Joyner has been wasted there as we knew he would but last season the best they looked was the bowl game with him at QB
Rattler is a statue and with that OL it is not gonna work
That’s why the smart ones are fake DemoRats. I see you Nick Saban and Danny Ford
I can’t find it but someone sent a picture of their route tree a couple weeks ago and it was a dick.
You gotta love twitter... what a nightmare..... giving a mouthpiece to anyone with a pulse .. but not any sense ...
People wonder why some in the "black community" speak against black athletes attending Clemson.
Don't speak on the black community and I won't speak on the white community.
You sound dumb. I bet you were one of the one's who stormed The Capital blindly following Trump commands.
I said million not billion. Tell them I said hello if you’re really on speaking teens.
I think the fact they are pretending Bell is the second coming of Debo Samuel is hilarious. Kid is a decent pass catching fullback who had a big game against a historically bad UNC defense last year. I think he did well against Vandy too.
But generally he’s not a big factor because 6’2 230lb tight end/RB hybrids (aka full backs) haven’t been featured players in college football in 20 years.
The fact that their fullbacks mama is on twitter complaining about touches is awesome, and 90 percent a function of their incessant need to overhype everything about their program.
But generally he’s not a big factor because 6’2 230lb tight end/RB hybrids (aka full backs) haven’t been featured players in college football in 20 years.
The fact that their fullbacks mama is on twitter complaining about touches is awesome, and 90 percent a function of their incessant need to overhype everything about their program.
Not true. It’s a more complicated deal than just some sort of ideological switch that happened right when the CRA of 64 was passed. Republicans were more supportive of the CRA than Democrats, to begin with. Dixiecrats’ opposition to federally imposed civil rights probably was what finally made them feel they could switch parties, but the conservative takeover of the Republican Party, which wasn’t completed until the 2000s, is what made the Republican Party more amenable to southerners.
Unfortunately, part of that conservatism in the 60s was a more libertarian position on federal civil rights legislation, but there were a number of other things like anti-communism, constitutionalism, and the gradual social liberal takeover of the Democrats starting in the late 60s that pushed conservative southerners towards the Republicans.
Last edited:
I like Shane Beamer as a coach and person
Decent guy
That said I want our Tigers to thump his ass
Decent guy
That said I want our Tigers to thump his ass
I always laugh at people claiming of the parties “switching”. The biggest lie the dems have ever told.
The Republican Party was literally formed to fight slavery. Their first presidential candidate was Lincoln who abolished slavery.
The dems wanted to keep slavery, formed the KKK and wanted to keep segregation.
Then we are supposed to believe the two parties had a conversation.
Republicans: “we know you dems have been the racists during our country’s history and have always been the bad guys.”
Democrats: “yes we know and we wish we could be the party that stands for fairness. Can we please switch sides for a little bit?”
Republicans: “ sure why not. We will now be the racists. We will switch now. Ready…. Go”
How stupid does this sound?
The Democratic Party was always a conglomeration of northern Union machines and southern Dixiecrat machines. The party split after the civil rights act and Goldwater republicanism’s stance that the federal government shouldn’t be have the power to enforce desegregation became more appealing. The mass migration of working class African Americans to the northern states during Jim Crow increased then number of black voters in the north whose interests were aligned with the pro-trade Union democrats and against the Republican industrialists. The same migration of black voters homogenized the formerly diverse Republican voter base in the south, leaving the former Lilly-White factionalists with greater power within the party and making it a more welcome landing spot for white segregationists like Strom Thurmond. Late 19th century politics wasn’t racially polarized, there was always an anti-black/pro segregation strain in both parties. The Dixiecrats for the Dems and the Lilly-Whites for the GOP (including presidents Taft and Hoover). Teddy Roosevelt’s exit from the GOP to form a progressive third party split the old GOP along conservative lines and shifted the power balance within the party towards conservatives. Nixon campaign led a “principled stand against school desegregation” as a wedge issue in order to court Dixiecrat voters who were disaffected by LBJ’s signing of the civil rights act.
While the GOP was founded in the 1850’s as a product of the Free Soil movement, it wasn’t anti-racist or even anti-slavery on a national level. It was anti-slavery in the territories and sympathetic to abolitionists, but still consistent with most of the prevailing racial paternalism of the day. Lincoln didn’t pursue the civil war as a referendum on abolition (the south did, however) but rather in the interests of preserving the economic and geopolitical power of the Union. Lincoln himself wasn’t some shining antiracist hero, he was a complex pragmatist with plenty of bad opinions on race of his own.
There absolutely was a mass exodus of Dixiecrat politicians and their voting constituencies to the Republican Party from 1960-1980 and it’s not hard to figure out why.
Last edited:
Most folks don’t realize that dems owned a super majority in the SC Senate in the early 90s and before. They had a simple majority until the 2000 election, coupled with J Verne Smith “conveniently” switching parties on the first week of the 2001 session. So right at 20 years ago, one of the reddest states in the union was controlled by a dem senate and governor.
Antifa stormed the Capital Building & blamed it on Trump supporters. This gave them an excuse to erect an unscalable wall around the Capital building with guards stationed around it. You’re about ready to find out why that wall was erected.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
**** Official ⚾ TI #4 Clemson @ Louisville In-game Thread (TODAY - 1 p.m.)
- Latest: TigerDabo6317