So, the leftists are having a pretend melt-down because the RINO Nikki Haley -- who, by the way, is not a natural born US citizen (*) -- gave the "wrong" answer to a "gotcha" question about the "cause" of the so-called (**) US Civil War.
Here is the truth about the "cause" of the so-called US Civil War --
Slavery wasn't the cause of the "Civil War".
The *cause* of the (falsely named) Civil War was the federal government's refusal to allow the Southern States to secede from the Union, as was their right to do, and to take all those sweet, sweet tax monies with them.
The main reason, though not the only reason, the Southern States wanted to secede was over slavery. But secession is a wholly different matter from the war.
(*) How odd is that? Not a peep from anyone, much less the leftists, over the fact the Haley is Constitutionally barred from occupying the office of the presidency.
(**) The US "Civil War" was not actually a civil war. In a civil war, two or more entities are fighting for control of the government of the same region. The US “Civil War” was – like the American “Revolution” – a war of attempted separation.
EDIT (2024/01/04):
1) Even most people of my generation are ill-educated, and would unthinkingly give the "right" (which is to say, factually wrong) answer. How much worse educated is the typical person of her generation?
2) It's quite possible that she never paid much attention to anything having to do the "Civil War", that she saw it as having nothing to do with her, as she is an Indian (dot, not feather) without roots in America.
Allow me to illustrate that last suspicion:
The last IT job I had before deciding to retire was in a 1.5-2 hour drive from home. Since I didn't want to spend that much time on the road every day, I rented a hotel room on a monthly basis and came home only on the weekends. Three or four years later, the hotel was sold to an Indian man (dot, not feather) in his 30s or 40s. I presume he grew up in the US, as he sounded like any mid-western American. Though, his parents had thick Indian accents.
About a year later, he bought the property next door to the hotel. It had a business on the ground floor and an apartment on the upper. He asked me to relocate to the apartment, as he thought my hotel room would earn him more money as a normal hotel room than as a long-term rental.
When he was showing me the apartment, he apologized for the swastika his mother -- a Hindu -- had drawn on the kitchen counter with some red substance. By the way, I was never able to fully scrub it off. Now, as he was apologizing, it was clear that he didn't understand *why* Americans consider swastikas offensive. He apparently thought it has something to do with the black-white racial divide; he said something to the effect that since I wasn't black, perhaps I wouldn't be as offended by it.
So, why did he not understand what a swastika signifies to Americans? Why did he think a black American would be more offended by the image of one than a white American? The reason is that he doesn't see that history as having anything to do with him, and so he never paid much attention to it.
Amusingly, black Americans are the group *least* likely to take offence at the image of a swastika. I, on the other hand, am in the group to take second-most offence -- an Evangelical Christian with Jewish ancestry. I'm also not ignorant; I well understand that the swastika long pre-dates the mid-century mass-murderer with a funny mustache.
