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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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 03:04 PM..
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.