Is the Civil Rights movement what turned the South Republican for 50 years..

Taft2016 said:
Your logical gymnastics aside....

In 1982 George Wallace won the black vote in the Alabama gubernatorial race. That's where the blind racial loyalty got underway.

The real question becomes; should a party that reaps 90% + of a single race be calling any other party "racist"?
Click to expand...

logical gymnastics? debate them instead of running away from them, pussy.
 
maineman said:
logical gymnastics? debate them instead of running away from them, pussy.
Click to expand...

So what would you like to debate? The transparently BS notion of "changing stripes?"

"Changing stripes" had nothing to do with the race issue and renouncing past positions on it. It had to do with embracing the expansion of government, the welfare state, and during the Cold War, rolling over on one's back for the Soviet Union.

That's what "changing stripes" meant. Changing stripes in that manner secured one the support of the national liberal media.

If David Duke had changed his stripes in that manner and remained a registered Democrat, he would have gone on to the US Senate and governor's mansion in Baton Rouge. Instead, he renounced his racist past and affiliations *WITHOUT* embracing big government and the welfare state, and became a Republican.

See? Had nothing to whatsoever to do with "Changing Stripes" on the race issue.
 
maineman said:
Claude Pepper changed his stripes early on and was one of the first inductees into the Florida Civil Rights Hall of Fame....
Click to expand...

And yet he said this:

The colored race will not vote, because in doing so under the present circumstances they endanger the supremacy of a race to which God has committed the destiny of a continent, perhaps of a world
Click to expand...

Would anyone who did *NOT* embrace big government, the welfare state, and was a Republican, who said this.... *EVER* get into *ANY* civil rights hall of fame....

Regardless of how much stripe changing he did?
 
Taft2016 said:
So what would you like to debate? The transparently BS notion of "changing stripes?"

"Changing stripes" had nothing to do with the race issue and renouncing past positions on it. It had to do with embracing the expansion of government, the welfare state, and during the Cold War, rolling over on one's back for the Soviet Union.

That's what "changing stripes" meant. Changing stripes in that manner secured one the support of the national liberal media.

If David Duke had changed his stripes in that manner and remained a registered Democrat, he would have gone on to the US Senate and governor's mansion in Baton Rouge. Instead, he renounced his racist past and affiliations *WITHOUT* embracing big government and the welfare state, and became a Republican.

See? Had nothing to whatsoever to do with "Changing Stripes" on the race issue.
Click to expand...

changing stripes is bullshit? Well... then I assume that you would agree that for the vast majority of southern voters who vigorously supported Jim Crow racism BEFORE the CRA, it would be pretty hard for them to change THEIR stripes and, in the course of a very few years, completely abandon their feelings of racial hatred and racial superiority. So... who DO those folks vote for today? They were the overwhelming majority before the CRA and they voted for democrats. Are you really saying that THEY all changed THEIR stripes and voted for republicans because the GOP championed the CRA? Really? Are you saying that Phillips was LYING about the "southern strategy"? Are you saying that Mehlman apologized to the NAACP for NOTHING?
 
So, in the end, you are equating opposition to liberalism with racism. And there's nothing to support that equation.

In fact, Theodore Bilbo was probably the most racist member of the Senate in the 20th century, and was a consistently reliable vote for FDR's New Deal proposals. His biography is named "Redneck Liberal."

George Wallace had a good chance of winning the Democrat nomination in 1972... and uber-liberal George McGovern went schlepping to Wallace's hospital bedside to seek his endorsement. Take away Wallace's opposition to integration and global communism, and on the remaining issues, to use his own words; there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between him and McGovern.
 
maineman said:
changing stripes is bullshit? Well... then I assume that you would agree that for the vast majority of southern voters who vigorously supported Jim Crow racism BEFORE the CRA, it would be pretty hard for them to change THEIR stripes and, in the course of a very few years, completely abandon their feelings of racial hatred and racial superiority. So... who DO those folks vote for today? They were the overwhelming majority before the CRA and they voted for democrats. Are you really saying that THEY all changed THEIR stripes and voted for republicans because the GOP championed the CRA? Really? Are you saying that Phillips was LYING about the "southern strategy"? Are you saying that Mehlman apologized to the NAACP for NOTHING?
Click to expand...

So you obviously had nothing doubtful to say about David Duke's transformation? I sure did. I didn't believe him anymore than I did Byrd.

Did you believe Edwin Edwards' transformation from crook to honest statesman? Not that it mattered.... Edwards went to prison anyway.
 
Taft2016 said:
Would anyone who did *NOT* embrace big government, the welfare state, and was a Republican, who said this.... *EVER* get into *ANY* civil rights hall of fame....

Regardless of how much stripe changing he did?
Click to expand...

it depends on whether or not they embraced the causes of the civil rights movement. Pepper clearly did. Florida rewarded him for his commitment to that cause.
 
maineman said:
it depends on whether or not they embraced the causes of the civil rights movement. Pepper clearly did. Florida rewarded him for his commitment to that cause.
Click to expand...

How exactly does one "embrace" the civil rights movement? What are the issues involved?

I don't recall any of these southern Republicans campaigning on the notion of a retrurn to segregation.
 
Of course, we already know everything you're saying is BS.

As you "heh heh heh" 'ed in the Benghazi thread, you have no interest in everyone learning the truth. You're only interested in the success rate of the liberal media in spreading the DNC endorsed perception.
 
Taft2016 said:
How exactly does one "embrace" the civil rights movement? What are the issues involved?

I don't recall any of these southern Republicans campaigning on the notion of a retrurn to segregation.
Click to expand...

as I said, the folks in Florida seemed to believe that Claude Pepper had embraced the causes of the civil rights movement. That's why they put him in their hall of fame.
 
Taft2016 said:
So you obviously had nothing doubtful to say about David Duke's transformation? I sure did. I didn't believe him anymore than I did Byrd.

Did you believe Edwin Edwards' transformation from crook to honest statesman? Not that it mattered.... Edwards went to prison anyway.
Click to expand...

my concern here is not necessarily the politicians, but the voters. You are the one who is claiming this mass epiphany whereby southern Jim Crow loving voters all of a sudden became black loving, kumbaya singing folks who HATED Jim Crow and turned against all those racist democrats who had supported it.
 
Its simply very clear. The same people, the same majority that supported Democrats until the late 60's began then to support Republicans. What was the major issue that affected the South at that time? What side were the Democrats on and what side were the republicans on?
 
1966stang said:
Given the obvious oxygen deprived nature of Truth Detectors time in the womb, his mother must have been quite efficient at holding her breath....
Click to expand...

So just being stupid isn't enough for you, you have to resort to playground antics. Can't say I am shocked.

Carry on dunce.
 
Jarod said:
Its simply very clear. The same people, the same majority that supported Democrats until the late 60's began then to support Republicans. What was the major issue that affected the South at that time? What side were the Democrats on and what side were the republicans on?
Click to expand...

That's an outright lie. Democrats continued holding Governorships and their vast monopoly onCongress decades later. few changed party affiliation and most who were racists and members of the KKK died in office as Democrats. No one switched parties you simple minded dunce. And the claims that they switched to the Republican Party after the CRA is too stupid for words.

Why is it that when bombarded with facts, dunces like you continue engaging in the same retarded rhetoric? Is it because you really are THAT stupid?
 
Truth Detector said:
That's an outright lie. Democrats continued holding Governorships and their vast monopoly onCongress decades later. few changed party affiliation and most who were racists and members of the KKK died in office as Democrats. No one switched parties you simple minded dunce. And the claims that they switched to the Republican Party after the CRA is too stupid for words.

Why is it that when bombarded with facts, dunces like you continue engaging in the same retarded rhetoric? Is it because you really are THAT stupid?
Click to expand...

It is true that the State Democratic parties held on a little longer by separating themselves from the national party.
 
maineman said:
my concern here is not necessarily the politicians, but the voters. You are the one who is claiming this mass epiphany whereby southern Jim Crow loving voters all of a sudden became black loving, kumbaya singing folks who HATED Jim Crow and turned against all those racist democrats who had supported it.
Click to expand...

No one but dunces like you are making this argument. How utterly stupid are you?

Democrats were the ones who instituted Jim Crow laws, not Republicans. Southern Democrats voted as a bloc to stop passage of the CRA. It was NEVER the Republicans. And those same racist Southern Democrats never left the Democratic Party and switched over to the Republican Party. That is a lie and a myth.

For nearly four decades Democrats still dominated the politics of the South as proven by the historic facts. So far all that we have gotten from dunces like you and Jarod are hyperbolic bullshit and strawmen. I posted voting records and historical facts.

Yet no matter how many times you are slapped with the facts, you continue bloviating ignorant.

The reason is simple, like your mind; you really are THAT stupid and THAT dishonest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top