U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:08 AM
Status: "Destroying False Hope..." (set 14 days ago)
 
Location: Houston for Living/Los Angeles for Work
1,165 posts, read 394,037 times
Reputation: 1489

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
So GOP leaders and Democrat leaders, and their voters, got together and mutually agreed to switch?

Why don't I hear GOP politicians pushing for segregation if there was a big switch? Why did mostly white Republican voters elect a black man , Tim Scott , for senator in SC?

Why would the GOP decide to adopt a racist platform after popular support for segregation dwindled so much the Democratic party gave it up? That makes no sense.
Dude, people are married to ideology, not political party. If Democrats came out tomorrow against LGBT rights, immigration reform, and abortion, and on the flip side Republicans came out for gun reform, abortion, and LGBT rights, there would be a massive flop from one party to the other. Thats exactly what happened with the Southern strategy. LBJ was a Southern Democrat. He introduced the voting rights act which was WILDLY unpopular in the South. As such Nixon and the Republican party decided this decisive issue was a way to get the Southern vote back so they started catering to them on social issues. The Democratic party on the other hand started making their platform to cater more to progressives to capture fleeing Republicans.

Your problem is that youre trying to make the parties seem as though they have always been the same. Lets make one thing clear: political parties are businesses for the most part. They are trying to gather as many members as they can. Thats it and thats all. The Republicans saw an opportunity in the South and they took it. Democrats reacted by becoming the party of progressives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,581 posts, read 3,994,519 times
Reputation: 2906
Quote:
Originally Posted by As Above So Below... View Post
Dude, people are married to ideology, not political party. If Democrats came out tomorrow against LGBT rights, immigration reform, and abortion, and on the flip side Republicans came out for gun reform, abortion, and LGBT rights, there would be a massive flop from one party to the other. Thats exactly what happened with the Southern strategy. LBJ was a Southern Democrat. He introduced the voting rights act which was WILDLY unpopular in the South. As such Nixon and the Republican party decided this decisive issue was a way to get the Southern vote back so they started catering to them on social issues. The Democratic party on the other hand started making their platform to cater more to progressives to capture fleeing Republicans.

Your problem is that youre trying to make the parties seem as though they have always been the same. Lets make one thing clear: political parties are businesses for the most part. They are trying to gather as many members as they can. Thats it and thats all. The Republicans saw an opportunity in the South and they took it. Democrats reacted by becoming the party of progressives.
Nixon was for Civil Rights. It was Republicans who pushed the civil rights legislation in Congress and Democratic politicians, Robert Byrd and Al Gore's father filibustered it. LBJ was a huge racist and had previously opposed civil rights.

Only one of the racist Democrats switched to the GOP. Robert Byrd, who was in the KKK at one point, did not switch. A very liberal politician.

You don't research the facts.

You have not provided any evidence that GOP was liberal prior to the 1960s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:12 AM
Status: "Destroying False Hope..." (set 14 days ago)
 
Location: Houston for Living/Los Angeles for Work
1,165 posts, read 394,037 times
Reputation: 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
Nixon was for Civil Rights. It was Republicans who pushed the civil rights legislation in Congress and Democratic politicians, Robert Byrd and Al Gore's father filibustered it. LBJ was a huge racist and had previously opposed civil rights.

You don't research the facts.

You have not provided any evidence that GOP was liberal prior to the 1960s.
Freeing the slaves and ending segregation were certainly not conservative causes...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:14 AM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,581 posts, read 3,994,519 times
Reputation: 2906
Quote:
Originally Posted by As Above So Below... View Post
Freeing the slaves and ending segregation were certainly not conservative causes...
That's your partisan assertion, not a fact. Lincoln was a Republican. I've read his speeches and I do not think he would be a Democrat today.

Anyway, moving on.

It is funny how I never get any response when I point out mostly white Republicans in SC elected one of 3 black senators, and an Indian female governor twice. It is not a convenient data point for your narrative so you don't address it.

The only black person on the Supreme Court is the very conservative Clarence Thomas who was smeared in his confirmation hearings by the same party who nominated Al Gore, the son of a segregationist senator who filibustered the Civil Rights Act.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:17 AM
Status: "Destroying False Hope..." (set 14 days ago)
 
Location: Houston for Living/Los Angeles for Work
1,165 posts, read 394,037 times
Reputation: 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
That's your partisan assertion, not a fact. Lincoln was a Republican.
Again, Republicans were not conservative on social issues at that time. What makes your argument ridiculous is that youre assuming the political parties always had the same views on social issues and thats easy to disprove.

Do you know what the words "conservative" and "liberal" even mean??? Look them up and tell me how something radical like de-segregation and ending slavery remotely match with the definition of the word conservative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:19 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
941 posts, read 412,807 times
Reputation: 460
I'd say Florida as well. Some people considered Florida the "New Jersey of the South", which I think is true. Florida has a lot of retirees from the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic such as states in the Tri-State Area (NJ, NY, and CT). Florida has a lot of transplants in general. Florida will lose the Southern culture and also everyone will no longer have Southern accents. Florida's beach culture and amusement park culture make it seem more like a state like California. Florida is the East Coast version of California in my opinion and the only difference between FL and CA is that Florida is a jungle, humid, and has hurricanes. CA is an expensive desert with no humidity and no hurricanes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,581 posts, read 3,994,519 times
Reputation: 2906
Quote:
Originally Posted by As Above So Below... View Post
Again, Republicans were not conservative on social issues at that time. What makes your argument ridiculous is that youre assuming the political parties always had the same views on social issues and thats easy to disprove.

Do you know what the words "conservative" and "liberal" even mean??? Look them up and tell me how something radical like de-segregation and ending slavery remotely match with the definition of the word conservative.
You have not provided any evidence that GOP was pro-choice on abortion, pro gun control, etc.

Associating racism with conservatism is the partisan liberal Democrat definition of conservatism. FDR dominated in the south back in the day prior to civil rights for black people. I think most people consider FDR the father of modern liberalism in this country. If you poll Democrats on greatest presidents, FDR is typically in the top 3 and that isn't the case for GOP voters. Lincoln is typically in top 3 for GOP voters.

The south went from voting for FDR to voting for politicians like Reagan. Reagan politics are not similar to FDR politics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Clemson, SC by way of Tyler,TX
4,843 posts, read 2,975,563 times
Reputation: 3391
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
Says a guy who lives in Denver but claims to live in Clemson. I've noticed that the people who assert there was a big switch are all partisan Democrats like you.

You can't articulate why white racists would elect Tim Scott, a black man, in SC.
Democrat? I'm conservative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:26 AM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,581 posts, read 3,994,519 times
Reputation: 2906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylord_Focker View Post
Democrat? I'm conservative.
Except you never say anything conservative. At least you finally took 'Southern pride' off your status.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 11:26 AM
Status: "Destroying False Hope..." (set 14 days ago)
 
Location: Houston for Living/Los Angeles for Work
1,165 posts, read 394,037 times
Reputation: 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
You have not provided any evidence that GOP was pro-choice on abortion, pro gun control, etc.
What part of "social issues have changed from generation to generation" is difficult to understand?

I cant show you that the GOP was pro gun control because when the GOP was more progressive, that wasnt much of an issue. I can show you that civil rights and women's suffrage (which were progressive issues, not a conservative ones) were supported by Republicans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top