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, 03:10 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
9,338 posts, read 4,642,795 times
Reputation: 3534

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
Bro, Even the National Review says Thurmond switched parties because of the Civil Rights Act.
I know for a fact National Review disputes the Big Switch theory that you are pushing.

I agree Strom Thurmond may have switched once segregationist policy was taken off the table with the passage of the Civil Rights Act That was probably the only thing keeping him in the Democrat party.

It was the GOP in congress that pushed the Civil Rights Act and it was Democrat politicians that filibustered it. You act like white racists did not know this.

What is the point in asserting that Democrats switched to Republican after Civil Rights Act passing if your point isn't that white racists vote GOP?

Do you acknowledge Strom Thurmond is the only segregationist senator that switched to the GOP and the article that you linked to as a factual piece did not make that clear?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:16 PM
 
Location: Washington Park, Denver
7,564 posts, read 7,051,685 times
Reputation: 8342
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
I know for a fact National Review disputes the Big Switch theory that you are pushing.
Just so I’m clear, it’s your position that neither party has fundamentally changed its platform since their founding?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Seattle
5,659 posts, read 3,432,856 times
Reputation: 4055
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post

I understand you haven't mentioned TIm Scott. You also havn't explained why these white racists if they switched to GOP would vote for Tim Scott.

Strom Thurmond switched b/c of his views on foreign policy, not b/c the GOP adopted a racist platform.
South Carolina is a Republican state right? Why wouldn't Republicans vote for Scott over a democrat? Who also happens to be black? Thomas Dixon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
9,338 posts, read 4,642,795 times
Reputation: 3534
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
Just so I’m clear, it’s your position that neither party has fundamentally changed its platform since their founding?
What issues has the GOP fundamentally shifted on? You haven't provided any evidence of a racist platform.

I agree that the Democrat party has become more socially liberal than it was. But it has always been fiscally liberal.

The south used to be fiscally liberal but it is fiscally conservative now. What has changed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
9,338 posts, read 4,642,795 times
Reputation: 3534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylord_Focker View Post
South Carolina is a Republican state right? Why wouldn't Republicans vote for Scott over a democrat? Who also happens to be black? Thomas Dixon.
Wouldn't white racists vote for a white person in a GOP primary?

Why would a black man want to represent white racists?

Scott would have beat a white Democrat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Seattle
5,659 posts, read 3,432,856 times
Reputation: 4055
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
Wouldn't white racists vote for a white person in a GOP primary?

Why would a black man want to represent white racists?

Scott would have beat a white Democrat.
Mystery surrounds two candidates in the S.C. Primary

Randall Young is his opponent. Phone doesn't work, PO Box as an address. The news didn't even have a picture of him and Hosea Cleveland. No campaign events or website even.

I'm not even saying South Carolinians are racist. But his opponent may as well have been Santa Claus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:39 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
9,338 posts, read 4,642,795 times
Reputation: 3534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylord_Focker View Post
Mystery surrounds two candidates in the S.C. Primary

Randall Young is his opponent. Phone doesn't work, PO Box as an address. The news didn't even have a picture of him and Hosea Cleveland. No campaign events or website even.

I'm not even saying South Carolinians are racist.

This seems insincere given you have described SC as a 'Confederate state' and just upthread you asserted racist Democrats switched to the GOP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Washington Park, Denver
7,564 posts, read 7,051,685 times
Reputation: 8342
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
What issues has the GOP fundamentally shifted on? You haven't provided any evidence of a racist platform.

I agree that the Democrat party has become more socially liberal than it was. But it has always been fiscally liberal.

The south used to be fiscally liberal but it is fiscally conservative now. What has changed?
Now we’re getting somewhere!

I haven’t ever said that the Republicans have a racist platform. They do seem to appeal to all the white nationalists in the country right now, but I’ll leave that to you to figure out why. I also haven’t seen any Nazis running as Democrats lately. Not sure what the appeal is there.

BUT to your points, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have changed significantly. I think the biggest problem is viewing the parties through the lens of today’s political climate. The parties were not as dogmatic as they are today. Republicans were socially progressive. You’d have to be to want to end slavery. Do you catch a whiff of social progressivism in their platform today? They also were not always fiscally conservative, but neither party was.

Teddy Roosevelt was quite progressive. Today’s Republican Party would never condone the idea of the creation of national parks. They’re actively trying to defund them and sell them off.

Obviously the Democrats have changed dramatically. The party of slavery is now the party favored by 80+% of the descendants of slaves.

Anyway, the narrative that Republicans are more friendly to minorities than Democrats seems to make you feel good, but the flip side of that is that it needs you to beleive that the vast majority of minorities are not smart enough to realize that they are being hoodwinked by the Democrats. Not a concept that has much intellectual weight behind it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 03:48 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
9,338 posts, read 4,642,795 times
Reputation: 3534
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
Now we’re getting somewhere!

I haven’t ever said that the Republicans have a racist platform. They do seem to appeal to all the white nationalists in the country right now, but I’ll leave that to you to figure out why. I also haven’t seen any Nazis running as Democrats lately. Not sure what the appeal is there.

BUT to your points, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have changed significantly. I think the biggest problem is viewing the parties through the lens of today’s political climate. The parties were not as dogmatic as they are today. Republicans were socially progressive. You’d have to be to want to end slavery. Do you catch a whiff of social progressivism in their platform today? They also were not always fiscally conservative, but neither party was.

Teddy Roosevelt was quite progressive. Today’s Republican Party would never condone the idea of the creation of national parks. They’re actively trying to defund them and sell them off.

Obviously the Democrats have changed dramatically. The party of slavery is now the party favored by 80+% of the descendants of slaves.

Anyway, the narrative that Republicans are more friendly to minorities than Democrats seems to make you feel good, but the flip side of that is that it needs you to beleive that the vast majority of minorities are not smart enough to realize that they are being hoodwinked by the Democrats. Not a concept that has much intellectual weight behind it.
I don't understand what you mean by white nationalists and how you know they all support GOP. That seems like a partisan assertion that you could not prove in court.

I've never said Republicans 'are more friendly to minorities than Democrats'. I've said the GOP doesn't have a white racist platform and I don't think there was a white racist en bloc switch to the GOP.

I don't think white racism is a big issue in this country anymore.

I don't think Republicans were 'socially progressive' as you define it back in the day.

You talk about intellectual weight but you linked an article that used Strom Thurmond switching to the GOP to make the case of a Big Switch despite Strom being the exception to the rule.

Last edited by ClemVegas; 07-11-2018 at 04:04 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2018, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Seattle
5,659 posts, read 3,432,856 times
Reputation: 4055
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
This seems insincere given you have described SC as a 'Confederate state' and just upthread you asserted racist Democrats switched to the GOP.
It's insincere of you to call me a liberal.

Read this article:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-the-gop-went-south

I find it to be very balanced.
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.

© 2005-2020, 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