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.
Arkansas was never red at the state level, especially back in the 80s, it may still be Democratic controlled today.
Ask yourself why Bill Clinton, protege of segregationist William Fullbright, was able to win several southern states that Democrats like Kerry and Obama couldn't win.
I think the answer could be is white racists in those states were attracted to him.
Given we know Democrats think there are a lot of white racists in the south today, it doesn't seem hard to believe they ran a candidate that had appeal to white racists. And nobody would call Bill Clinton or Al Gore conservatives. lol
Governor is Republican and the House of Represenatives has 3 times the number of Republicans as it does Democratic.
HIGHLIGHTS
The Arkansas Legislature was reliably Democratic until the 2012 elections.
Since 1992, Democrats have held a trifecta for 12 of the 24 years.
Republicans captured multiple statewide offices in 2010 and the governorship and legislature in 2014.
This reinforces my point there was no Big Switch. You would have expected a Big Switch to occur in 60s and 70s if LBJ supporting civil rights was the inflection point.
And that as the southern states become more modern, more affluent, more educated as transplants move in, it has generally become more Republican than before. Arkansas has had less transplants than other southern states, so it is lagging a bit in this switch. But interestingly, the heavily populated NC only came under full control in 2012, because the rural areas were a lot more Democrat than the large metros with large suburban areas. Most of the population of NC is in the center of the state.
So when Clinton was gov, it was Democratic at state level, and thus his Confederate support must have been aimed at Democratic voters. Which makes sense given the history of the two parties and the fact he is the protege of a segregatist WIlliam Fullbright.
The true appeal of Bill Clinton for the Democratic party was that he could get the black vote turned out while still appealing to good old boy southerners.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 11-23-2017 at 12:07 AM..
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simpsonvilllian
...............
You have sustained through this entire argument that Dems where the "real" racist, while arguing that there was no ideological flip/switch.
That premise does not work when you take into account how recently Southern States went from D to R.
As I already stated, you cant argue they died, it would would mean a 1 to 1 replacement ratio that is impossible.
Your only other choice is to actually accept your own second premise, which is that dems really are the racist ones, and that the South was ok with electing those racist right up until 7 years ago.
what you don't understand is there is much lower turnout in state elections. And the state districts are smaller so Democrats have more favorable demographics, larger percentage of black voters for example in many districts than at the state level.
What you can't deny is the trend to GOP as the south became less racist and more educated and middle class.
If white racist simply flipped parties, it would make sense the GOP has Jim Crow laws or is pushing for Jim Crow today. It doesn't, despite a majority of Republicans.
Any Big Switch needs a carrot. You can't identify the white racist GOP carrot. The fact LBJ went along with civil rights act of 1964 doesn't mean white racists flip to GOP , given that civil rights legislation would not have passed without GOP and GOP's historic support of civil rights starting with the abolition of slavery.
I suspect that if black voters start voting GOP in a larger percentage in the future, you will see more racial strife than recent decades. Let's see how the whites in the Democratic party responds if more black voters start voting GOP.
Black republicans are viciously attacked by white Democrats all the time, and a lot of black Democrats as well. I remember reading a death wish for Clarence Thomas by a female Democrat. The Democrats cooked up this phony sexual harrassment charge against Thomas when he was nominated for the Supreme Court. Gloria Allred popped up with accusers against the black Republican that ran in 2012. Depicting black men as sexual predators is actually a hallmark of white racists back in the day.
Happy thanksgiving everybody.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 11-23-2017 at 12:40 AM..
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,610,214 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simpsonvilllian
what you don't understand is there is much lower turnout in state elections. And the state districts are smaller so Democrats have more favorable demographics, larger percentage of black voters for example in many districts than at the state level.
What you can't deny is the trend to GOP as the south became less racist and more educated and middle class.
If white racist simply flipped parties, it would make sense the GOP has Jim Crow laws or is pushing for Jim Crow today. It doesn't, despite a majority of Republicans.
Any Big Switch needs a carrot. You can't identify the white racist GOP carrot. The fact LBJ went along with civil rights act of 1964 doesn't mean white racists flip to GOP , given that civil rights legislation would not have passed without GOP and GOP's historic support of civil rights starting with the abolition of slavery.
I suspect that if black voters start voting GOP in a larger percentage in the future, you will see more racial strife than recent decades. Let's see how the whites in the Democratic party responds if more black voters start voting GOP.
Black republicans are viciously attacked by white Democrats all the time, and a lot of black Democrats as well. I remember reading a death wish for Clarence Thomas by a female Democrat. The Democrats cooked up this phony sexual harrassment charge against Thomas when he was nominated for the Supreme Court. Gloria Allred popped up with accusers against the black Republican that ran in 2012. Depicting black men as sexual predators is actually a hallmark of white racists back in the day.
Happy thanksgiving everybody.
You are so partisan and disingenuous it's not even funny. If your premise were even close to the mark, the north and California would have stayed Republican
HIGHLIGHTS
The Arkansas Legislature was reliably Democratic until the 2012 elections.
Since 1992, Democrats have held a trifecta for 12 of the 24 years.
Republicans captured multiple statewide offices in 2010 and the governorship and legislature in 2014.
This reinforces my point there was no Big Switch. You would have expected a Big Switch to occur in 60s and 70s if LBJ supporting civil rights was the inflection point.
And that as the southern states become more modern, more affluent, more educated as transplants move in, it has generally become more Republican than before. Arkansas has had less transplants than other southern states, so it is lagging a bit in this switch. But interestingly, the heavily populated NC only came under full control in 2012, because the rural areas were a lot more Democrat than the large metros with large suburban areas. Most of the population of NC is in the center of the state.
So when Clinton was gov, it was Democratic at state level, and thus his Confederate support must have been aimed at Democratic voters. Which makes sense given the history of the two parties and the fact he is the protege of a segregatist WIlliam Fullbright.
The true appeal of Bill Clinton for the Democratic party was that he could get the black vote turned out while still appealing to good old boy southerners.
North Carolina is majority Republican in the legislature, only because it's been gerrymandered to a fare-thee-well by the RWNJs who run that pigsty!
I briefly considered a career in law when I was in school, and decided against it because lawyers do not have the luxury of representing only people with whom they agree, or who are unfailingly kind, honest, and upstanding. At some point, just about every lawyer will have to work with a client they may find truly horrible. It was not something I felt I could do effectively, if at all, but I am very glad there are those who can, as everyone is entitled to competent representation. I am not about to judge Mr. Jones, or any other attorney, on the basis of a single nasty client.
What’s the story here — Defense attorney defends his client? Legal ethics require that an attorney is required to defend their clients to the fullest. The constitution makes it a right to have legal representation.
What I see from this non-story is desperation on the Moore team to blow up something that isn’t controversial into a campaign issue.
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.
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.
