Desh hates blacks, Latinos, and Asians, apparently.
These racist comments are all from her own her posts:
Next time a leftist tries the "party switch/Southern strategy" lie; blast them
- Thread starter Legion
- Start date
Desh hates blacks, Latinos, and Asians, apparently.
These racist comments are all from her own her posts:
I agree that the Southern Strategy concept is somewhat exaggerated, but the article overlooks some changes toward Republicans that did have some racial influences.
1. Republicans voting strength had been growing before the 1960's, but the 1960s showed a reversal at the presidential level with Democrats losing most of the Deep South beginning in 1964. In 1968 Wallace won those states and that certainly had a racial component. After 1968 Republicans won the South in every election except 1976.
2. While Southern Democratic officials or voters did not change parties, Democratic voters changed their votes at the presidential level.They became presidential Republicans.
3. Republicans did dominate at the presidential level and eventually other offices as well. The "rolling realignment" started at the presidential level, then congressional offices, then state-wide and legislative seats, and then county offices. Most county offices did not become Republican until after 2000.
Over those years racial issues became decreasingly less important and few policy issues involved race. By the time Democratic county officials switched parties it had almost nothing to do with partisan politics. The state was increasingly voting straight Republican and Democratic county officials (and judges) were being defeated and they switched parties to stay in office.
The picture is changing in the largest urban areas as they vote Democratic.
THE FACTS
- Richard Nixon, the man who is typically credited with creating "The Southern Strategy", lost the deep South in 1968.
- In contrast, DEMOCRAT Jimmy Carter nearly swept the region in 1976, nearly 12 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
- Then in 1992, over 28 years later, DEMOCRAT Bill Clinton, won Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, and West Virginia.
- The truth is Republicans didn't hold a majority of Southern Congressional seats until 1994, 30 years after the Civil Rights Act.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
I wrote up a little piece on this particular lie as well in AProudLefty's thread about it (as copied below) ---
The "party switching" BS is a lie. It never happened. Demonkkkrats, since their founding in 1828, have always been the pro-slavery party. Republicans, since their founding in 1854, have always been the anti-slavery party.
What is funny though is that the Demonkkkrat's own website starts off their own history in the 1920s with "women's suffrage". Why is that?? Why do they wish to skip over a whole century of their own history?? Oh, that's right, they wish to skip over their history of supporting slavery... skip over their opposition to Republicans ending slavery (and their subsequent formation of the KKK)... skip over their opposition to giving reparations to slaves (you know, the people who ACTUALLY experienced damages during that time period)... skip over the fact that Republicans formed and funded Howard University... skip over Demonkkkrat opposition to making black people citizens... skip over the fact that Republicans fought against the KKK that the Demonkkkrats founded... skip over the fact that Demonkkkrats OPPOSED allowing black people to vote... skip over the fact that REPUBLICANS elected the first black representatives and senators... skip over the fact that DEMONKKKRATS implemented and supported Jim Crow Laws... skip over the fact that REPUBLICANS were already supporting women's suffrage in the late 1800s... skip over the fact that DEMONKKRATS continued to support the KKK (and its domestic terrorism) in the early 1900s... skip over the fact that it was REPUBLICANS who led the women's suffrage movement...
Then, there's more history from the 1920s and on that the Demonkkkrat Party website conveniently leaves out, including supporting the lynching of blacks, continued KKK support, their mental enslavement of blacks via the "New Deal" economic benefits that they gave to blacks, their opposition to civil rights during the 1930s-60s, their internment of Japanese Americans, their continued support for segregation, the fact that a Demonkkkrat shot MLK, the fact that Demonkkkrats created the modern day welfare system, and much more...
Meanwhile, the Republican Party website starts their history off right at 1854 when the Party was formed, and truthfully speaks about their anti-slavery reasons for forming. It also gets into the fact that Republicans were the party to create national parks, have the first black governor, have the first woman representative, grant citizenship to the native tribes ("Native Americans"), have the first hispanic senator, have the first Asian-American senator, place the first woman on SCOTUS, and etc...
The parties NEVER changed. The Demonkkrats are still the same hateful racist compulsive pro-slavery bigots today that they were at their formation, and the Republicans are still the same anti-slavery freedom-loving liberty-advocates that they were at their formation.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
They didn't discuss it in AProudLefty's thread about it either, after I brought the thread to standstill at post #3... then it was just typical lefty responses from that point onward that didn't even attempt to refute a single point that I made.
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
It was REPUBLICANS who fought for and implemented civil rights legislation. Demonkkkrats opposed it... they even filibustered it. Stop attempting to rewrite history, moron...
There was nothing “sudden” about the change in philosophies, dumbfuck. It began, slowly, much earlier than Nixon.
Gullible moron
Your new salutation is very appropriate.
Geeko Sportivo
Verified User
No idiot! First of all the Republicans formed right out of the Democrat Party.
But, the Southern States who were hell bent to Keep slavery took over the Democrat Party.
But even then, If it weren't for several Democrats in Congress crossing political lines to vote yes, Lincoln would have never been able to pass his 13th Amendment!
After the passing of the 13th Amendment- the Democrat party was still divided among itself with those who were from the SOUTH that wanted slavery and those who did not from both the South and the North.
It wasn't until the Democrats rejected George Wallace and his racist views by not nominating him as a presidential contender and thus rejecting him- did the Democrats unite across the party to stamp out racism and end it in America. ANd the Democrat Party has been united on that stance since then.
But since then, the RACISM flipped over to the REPUBLICAN SIDE- AND IT HAS BEEN A PART OF THEIR PARTY PLATFORM SINCE- Over the last 60 years!
Perhaps you should have paid attention during HIGH SCHOOL AMERICAN HISTORY class- or you wouldn't have to be corrected for your BRAIN FARTS!
Last edited:
Who told you that?
Geeko Sportivo
Verified User
THAT IS THE ACTUAL HISTORY OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY available to you in many books written on the matter!
The Democrats used to be divided on racial matters- for many years- but united during the George Wallace era to defeat racism in America- and has been UNITED on that for the last 60 years!
George Wallace tried to hi-jack the Democrat party- JUST LIKE TRUMP HI-JACKED THE REPUBLICAN PARTY- BUT THE DEMOCRATS WERE SMARTER THAN YOU IDIOTS!
THE DEMOCRATS WERE SMART ENOUGH TO REJECT GEORGE WALLACE!
So you say.
When did Republicans gain a majority of Southern Congressional seats?
Geeko Sportivo
Verified User
Dude that flips back and forth and has for too long to count back!
So you don't know the history, as I suspected.
How many of the DEMOCRATS in Congress who opposed the Civil Rights Act abandoned the Jackass Party in later years?
In a race in which Hoover won with 58% of the popular vote nationwide, you are actually willing to claim Hoover getting 47% of the vote proves the south wasn't overwhelmingly Democrat?
Of the southern states that Hoover lost, which would be considered the deep south, he only got 34% of the popular vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1928_United_States_presidential_election
The claim that the 1928 election showed a competitiveness for Republicans in the south is specious. They trailed by 10 points in the entire south compared to the rest of the country and 28 points in the deep south.
I can’t fix your willful ignorance, Jethro. That’s something you’ll have to fix.
Margin of victory for Hoover:
Tennessee, 7.72%
Virginia, 8.01%
North Carolina, 9.87%
Margins:
Alabama -
Hoover 48.49%
Smith 51.33%
Georgia -
Hoover 43.36%
Smith 56.56%
Mississippi -
Hoover 17.90%
Smith 82.10%
Louisiana -
Hoover 23.70%
Smith 76.29%
South Carolina -
Hoover 8.54%
Smith 91.39&
Always priceless when they leave off the source, although one could pretty much guess where this revision of history comes from
Small item your "historian" left off, "Once upon a time, the Democratic Party was the Party of (CONSERVATIVES), and the Republican Party was the Party of (LIBERALS)," you really didn't think they were called Radical Republicans because they were conservative did you?
Party name means nothing, it is the ideology behind that party that defines it not what they call themselves at that moment in time
Time for one of "copy and paste's" corny copy and paste video clips to get him out of this disaster
And somehow you think that means Republicans did well in the south?