U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 04-21-2019, 08:45 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,585 posts, read 4,011,810 times
Reputation: 2926

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
You can't articulate why Boulder, Colorado is so clean if you think leftwing ideas lead to dystopia.
Boulder is def. not clean.

Also, Boulder's leftwing cabal implemented anti-growth policies that have jacked up housing costs and rent.

One of the cleanest and nicest downtowns in the country is Greenville SC and it is a Republican area.

I note that you still haven't detailed the white racist policies of the GOP. At least Jussie understands evidence is important even if you have to fake it.

You've conceded Republicans are not for segregation yet still act like GOP is just the Democrat party back in the day.

I've never seen Republican politicians try to adopt a black accent when they speak to a black audience, like HIllary and other Democrats have.

I've never seen Republicans imply black people are too dumb or lazy to obtain a photo ID to vote. Democrats do imply that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-21-2019, 08:51 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
9,876 posts, read 6,622,462 times
Reputation: 6279
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t View Post
Why did the Southern segregationist democrats largely support the New Deal and the Great Society, both of which were government expansions, i.e. liberalism? Could it be because they were liberals, not conservatives?
Political compromises had to be made for the Southern politicians to support in general the New Deal legislation. Such as excluding farm workers and domestic helpers from Social Security eligiblity - most of whom were black. The FHA would not insure suburban mortgages for black homebuyers. Lower payscales were specified for black workers in the NRA projects.

It would stretch the imagination to call Southern Dixiecrats "liberals".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 08:54 PM
 
15,327 posts, read 4,047,808 times
Reputation: 11056
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
The south flipped to Republican because of Republican transplants moving in as the south industrialized and modernized.
.
Now that is one very large case of BS right there.

What you are effectively claiming is:

1. Many millions, or tens of millions, of Republicans moved into the South in the late 1960's. At the same time, very few Northern Democrats or Independent did....it was JUST Republicans that moved.

(so wrong....I was there...in TN and FL and this was not the case. In fact, transplants tended to be Purple)

2. That the South industrialized and modernized, all of a sudden, almost instantly when the Civil Rights and Voting Rights acts were signed and the decade afterwards.

(this is total BS, of course!).....

It is very true that most civilization, from the cotton gin to the plow, was brought to the South from the North. So you have that right...but this industrialization was over the last 120 years or so.

Movement to the South in the time period noted was to mostly two places - Florida (retirement, etc.) and Atlanta (manufacturing and more). Neither were populated by Republicans moving down from up north...more than by any other type of person. In fact, as more people have moved down, these areas have become more purple or even blue (Charlotte, NC for example)...

The simple fact is that the South went Republican due to wanting to hold on White Power and Segregation and didn't approve of voting and civil rights. Period.

Read it and learn....

"First Nixon, then Ronald Reagan, and finally George Herbert Walker Bush successfully adopted toned-down versions of Wallace's anti-busing, anti-federal government platform [b]to pry low- and middle-income whites from the Democratic New Deal coalition"

"George Wallace laid the foundation for the dominance of the Republican Party in American society through the manipulation of racial and social issues in the 1960s and 1970s. He was the master teacher, and Richard Nixon and the Republican leadership that followed were his students."

You are effectively claiming that all of history is wrong.....and that what really happened is Trumpers moved down to the South and turned it Republican.

That's really far-out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 08:54 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,585 posts, read 4,011,810 times
Reputation: 2926
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverkris View Post
Political compromises had to be made for the Southern politicians to support in general the New Deal legislation. Such as excluding farm workers and domestic helpers from Social Security eligiblity - most of whom were black. The FHA would not insure suburban mortgages for black homebuyers. Lower payscales were specified for black workers in the NRA projects.

It would stretch the imagination to call Southern Dixiecrats "liberals".
They were fiscal liberals.

Only one of the segregationist Democrat senators switched parties.

If Robert Byrd, William Fullbright, Fritz Hollings, Al Gore's father, etc didn't switch, why does it make sense to believe their voters did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,585 posts, read 4,011,810 times
Reputation: 2926
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
.
What is far out is arguing that the GOP decided to adopt white racist policy AFTER popular support dwindled so much that the Democratic Party, the party of slavery, segregation, KKK, Jim Crow, lynching, etc, decided to give it up to remain viable.

If there was still all this support for white racist policy in this country, why would the Democratic party give it up? The Democratic party didn't give up white racism on principle and every white racist at the time understood that. They were defeated politically on that issue.

You act like white racists didn' tknow Democrats Robert Byrd and Al Gore's father filibustered the Civil Rights act and they didn't know Nixon was for civil rights.

The Democrat party today is really the exact same as it was in that it still uses identity politics , appeals based on race and gender, to win elections. It is just switched up the race that it targets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 09:07 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,013 posts, read 2,740,700 times
Reputation: 6945
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
If Robert Byrd, William Fullbright, Fritz Hollings, Al Gore's father, etc didn't switch, why does it make sense to believe their voters did.
I could just as easily say that, since Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond did switch, then it makes sense to believe their voters did as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 09:09 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,013 posts, read 2,740,700 times
Reputation: 6945
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
Or we would like to vet people coming into this country. Many of the people coming in are criminals and they have killed or raped Americans, like what happened with Mollie Tibbets.

They aren't paying taxes, they take jobs that could go to poor Americans, they suppress wages, etc.

You are calling it racist because it is about political power for your party. You don't care about the country.

I don't think you care about illegal immigrants outside of their votes. You want to harvest those votes.

You can't articulate what is wrong with vetting people before they enter this country. If an illegal kills a family member, I think you might starting singing a different tune.
Exactly as I predicted. You denied it. And then you accused ME of some misdeeds ('not caring about the country').

The fact you think I only care about their votes indicates to me that you simply cannot understand why I do not share your feelings of fear about them. Which is a form of projection, as I also predicted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 09:10 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,585 posts, read 4,011,810 times
Reputation: 2926
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
I could just as easily say that, since Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond did switch, then it makes sense to believe their voters did as well.
Jesse Helms was not a segregationist senator as far as know. Strom Thumrond is the only one, and yet leftwingers like you, who like to racebait minorities, only cite Strom Thurmond. You never talk about Robert Byrd , AL Gore's father and all the other ones. They didn't switch.

As far as I know, Strom never said anything racist after he switched to the GOP. He switched because SC was already switching to the GOP, and he was fiscally conservative which was atypical for the segregationists.

Jesse Helms got into trouble opposing racial quotas in hiring, affirmative action. Opposing using race in making hiring decisions is the opposite of racism. He was making a labor argument, not advocating racism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 09:15 PM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,585 posts, read 4,011,810 times
Reputation: 2926
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
Exactly as I predicted. You denied it. And then you accused ME of some misdeeds ('not caring about the country').

The fact you think I only care about their votes indicates to me that you simply cannot understand why I do not share your feelings of fear about them. Which is a form of projection, as I also predicted.
You just accused me and others of being racist despite no evidence of that. You act like you can read the minds of people. I just gave numerous non racist reasons to oppose illegal immigration and you cry raaaaaaaaaaaaaacist again.

Far left peole like you cannot discuss politics without accusing people of racism without evidence. You are childish. You are Jussie Smollet pulling a race hoax.

We know leftwingers like you would want a Republican to go to jail for not paying taxes but you have no problem with illegal immigrants not paying taxes.

Why would any rational person be opposed to vetting people before they come into this country and how do we do that if we don[t have a wall that forces them to enter the country legally?

You want drug cartels coming in and pushing drugs to kids and commiting violent crimes? How is that good for the country? You can't justify your position so you cry raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2019, 09:19 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,013 posts, read 2,740,700 times
Reputation: 6945
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemVegas View Post
Jesse Helms was not a segregationist senator as far as know. Strom Thumrond is the only one, and yet leftwingers like you, who like to racebait minorities, only cite Storm Thurmond.

Jesse Helms got into trouble opposing racial quotas in hiring, affirmative action. Opposing using race in making hiring decisions is the opposite of racism.
I already went through this with somebody else in this thread.

The notion that all individual politicians had to "switch parties" in order for this thesis to be true is ridiculous. In case you didn't know, there are these things called "elections," and for a large-scale party switching to take place, the only thing that needs to happen is for people to start voting for candidates in the other party. Duh.
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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
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