Prester John.

(November 7, 2016 at 1:23 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(November 7, 2016 at 9:17 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: There was a vocal isolationist element, but they were impotent. They never blocked any legislation they didn't like or passed any that they did like. America First had, total, ~800,000 members out of the 150,000,000 people in the US, and we don't know how many of those were actively working on their programs. They made noise and smoke, but there was no fire.

I don't think membership rolls necessarily attest to the depth, or lack of depth, of national sentiments. Isolationism went back to the end of WWI and had broad bipartisan support -- witness our refusal to join the League of Nations.

 I do think the isolationists were losing badly after the Fall of France. Let's go to the polls. (Cherry-picking poll numbers is inevitable, but not advised.)

(November 7, 2016 at 1:57 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:  I do think the isolationists were losing badly after the Fall of France. Let's go to the polls. (Cherry-picking poll numbers is inevitable, but not advised.)

Maybe you missed it, but I've already made the point that things had changed by 1940:

(October 12, 2016 at 8:24 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(October 11, 2016 at 7:02 pm)abaris Wrote: The major difference being that FDR didn't gear the whole economy towards a future war effort.

He certainly did as much as he could in 1940, starting with giving US Army and Navy stocks to the UK (necessitating replenishment), signing off on the Two-Ocean Navy bill that was for the time astounding, and a bill calling for 100,000 planes a year to be built by 1945. Also, the draft. [...]

I do appreciate the additional supporting data, thanks.

(November 7, 2016 at 2:33 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(November 7, 2016 at 1:57 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:  I do think the isolationists were losing badly after the Fall of France. Let's go to the polls. (Cherry-picking poll numbers is inevitable, but not advised.)

Maybe you missed it, but I've already made the point that things had changed by 1940:

(October 12, 2016 at 8:24 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: He certainly did as much as he could in 1940, starting with giving US Army and Navy stocks to the UK (necessitating replenishment), signing off on the Two-Ocean Navy bill that was for the time astounding, and a bill calling for 100,000 planes a year to be built by 1945. Also, the draft. [...]

I do appreciate the additional supporting data, thanks.

I made my statement without reference to yours.

(November 7, 2016 at 2:56 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(November 7, 2016 at 2:33 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Maybe you missed it, but I've already made the point that things had changed by 1940:


I do appreciate the additional supporting data, thanks.

I made my statement without reference to yours.

Except that you quoted me, giving the appearance of replying to me. It seemed appropriate for me to point out my earlier post, especially with the unnecessary snark at the end of your reply.

(November 7, 2016 at 3:23 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(November 7, 2016 at 2:56 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: I made my statement without reference to yours.

Except that you quoted me, giving the appearance of replying to me. It seemed appropriate for me to point out my earlier post, especially with the unnecessary snark at the end of your reply.

If I quoted you it was without note of whom I was quoting.

" (Cherry-picking poll numbers is inevitable, but not advised.)"

This always happens.

(November 7, 2016 at 3:49 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(November 7, 2016 at 3:23 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Except that you quoted me, giving the appearance of replying to me. It seemed appropriate for me to point out my earlier post, especially with the unnecessary snark at the end of your reply.

If I quoted you it was without note of whom I was quoting.

Duly noted, I guess.

(November 7, 2016 at 7:37 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(November 7, 2016 at 3:49 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: If I quoted you it was without note of whom I was quoting.

Duly noted, I guess.

It's hard to see the whole post on this phone.

No prob. I just assume that when the quote is my own, the reply is directed at me. We're good.