Rand Paul: the GOP can't "flip" and support gay marriage

[Blue3]

Rand Paul says Republicans can agree to disagree on some issues and be a "big tent" party.... but that the GOP can't "flip" and suddenly start supporting gay marriage, that would upset the social conservatives.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/07/rand-paul-gay-marriage_n_5658937.html

[Mr. Illini]

Barry Goldwater: the GOP can't "flip" and support desegregation

["'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"]

Barry Goldwater: the GOP can't "flip" and support desegregation

To be fair, Goldwater was in the camp that "flipped" the party away from civil rights.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Got to do what you need to do to win. It's sad but true. I regret that he didn't just say "leave it to the states" and push the issue under the rug like he has been doing for a while.

[Blue3]

And do you think Rand Paul would flip back if he were to be elected?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

And do you think Rand Paul would flip back if he were to be elected?

Most likely. As much as I like Rand Paul, I am growing weary of quite a few of his Iowa flips.

[GaussLaw]

Barry Goldwater: the GOP can't "flip" and support desegregation

Someone needs to learn history.

GOPers were massively in favor of Civil Rights in the '50s and early '60s.

Goldwater tried to flip the party against it and racists gradually moved to the GOP since.

[Matty]

It's funny how most of the democrats on this site claim that rand paul is not an important figure in 2016, yet I come on here daily and there is a new thread about him.

[Blue3]

And do you think Rand Paul would flip back if he were to be elected?

Most likely. As much as I like Rand Paul, I am growing weary of quite a few of his Iowa flips.

I remember in 2008, when Obama voted for the telecom immunity bill. All the MSNBC pundits were saying "of course, he had to do that to get elected, but just wait until he's President..." So I wouldn't hold my breath for Rand Paul switching back again.

It's funny how most of the democrats on this site claim that rand paul is not an important figure in 2016, yet I come on here daily and there is a new thread about him.

It's because he's the only one generating interesting news at this time.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

And do you think Rand Paul would flip back if he were to be elected?

Most likely. As much as I like Rand Paul, I am growing weary of quite a few of his Iowa flips.

I remember in 2008, when Obama voted for the telecom immunity bill. All the MSNBC pundits were saying "of course, he had to do that to get elected, but just wait until he's President..." So I wouldn't hold my breath for Rand Paul switching back again.

Obama never opposed telecom immunity. He had to do what he needed to do, as you mentioned. Rand Paul on the other hand has been very non-commital to the cause of marriage equality, so I don't think he will take a solid line on the matter one way or another if he is elected.

[memphis]

Barry Goldwater: the GOP can't "flip" and support desegregation

Someone needs to learn history.

GOPers were massively in favor of Civil Rights in the '50s and early '60s.

Goldwater tried to flip the party against it and racists gradually moved to the GOP since.

You're grossly overstating the case for a pro-Civil Rights Republican Party. The truth is that, unlike gay marriage today, Civil Rights was not an issue that separated the parties from each other. Both parties were split on the issue. For whatever reason, the strongest supporters (lefty idealists) and opponents (Southern conservatives) both tended to be Democrats. The GOP was very much the party of business, corporate America, and mainstream respectability. For the most part, they had very little interest in rocking that boat either way.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

It's funny how most of the democrats on this site claim that rand paul is not an important figure in 2016, yet I come on here daily and there is a new thread about him.

Who the hell says Paul isn't important in 2016? The guy is clearly running for President.

[GaussLaw]

Barry Goldwater: the GOP can't "flip" and support desegregation

Someone needs to learn history.

GOPers were massively in favor of Civil Rights in the '50s and early '60s.

Goldwater tried to flip the party against it and racists gradually moved to the GOP since.

Someone needs to learn history.

Goldwater was massively in favor of Civil Rights in the 50s and 60s for the exception of laws like the CRA in 1964.

Fair point, but Goldwater supported civil rights less than virtually every other Republican at the time.  Most Republicans at that point had no problems with the CRA and voted for all of the other legislation Goldwater supported.  Goldwater's nomination led to whites in the Deep South beginning to vote Republican.  Note that racism overall has gone down for everyone, but the GOP is the more racist party now(in that more racists[at least against blacks] join it) largely because of Goldwater's nomination in 1964.

[Rockefeller GOP]

1) The civil rights revisionist history where all the racist "conservative" Southern Democrats neatly filed on over to the GOP once the heroic liberal Democrats got control of their party is amusing.

2) The GOP absolutely can flip on gay marriage, it absolutely should flip on gay marriage and it will absolutely NOT cost them any states in the electoral college.  It can't afford to flip on social issues like abortion or gun control (and why would it?), but gay marriage is a dying issue.  I saw once that Republicans under 30 actually support it at a much higher rate than Democrats over 50, so it won't even be partisan within a few years...

[henster]

Republican support for gay marriage is still in the 20s/30s and has barely budged in the past few years I really can't see it just being shrugged off by the base.

[King]

Goldwater hated the Southern Christian racists that infiltrated the GOP post Civil Rights Act and fought against them until his dying day.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Goldwater hated the Southern Christian racists that infiltrated the GOP post Civil Rights Act and fought against them until his dying day.

What about all the Birchers and other far-right kooks who supported Goldwater in places like Arizona, California, etc.?

The Republican Party has always been staunchly conservative, heavily white Protestant, pro-business, anti-union, and prone to having a nativist streak. The South has a disproportionate share of those demographics and ideological currents nowadays, so consequently, the center of gravity of conservative Republicanism has shifted toward the South in recent decades.

And for those who think New England was an exception,  I have two words: Calvin Coolidge.

[GaussLaw]

Barry Goldwater: the GOP can't "flip" and support desegregation

Someone needs to learn history.

GOPers were massively in favor of Civil Rights in the '50s and early '60s.

Goldwater tried to flip the party against it and racists gradually moved to the GOP since.

Someone needs to learn history.

Goldwater was massively in favor of Civil Rights in the 50s and 60s for the exception of laws like the CRA in 1964.

Fair point, but Goldwater supported civil rights less than virtually every other Republican at the time.  Most Republicans at that point had no problems with the CRA and voted for all of the other legislation Goldwater supported.  Goldwater's nomination led to whites in the Deep South beginning to vote Republican.  Note that racism overall has gone down for everyone, but the GOP is the more racist party now(in that more racists[at least against blacks] join it) largely because of Goldwater's nomination in 1964.

Absolutely not. Did Republicans fund the lawsuit for Brown V. Board or was it Goldwater? Did Republicans consistently donate to the NCAAP or was it Goldwater? Were Republicans consistently members of the NCAAP or was it Goldwater? Goldwater legitimately fought for civil rights more than any republican or dem for the exception of the CRA in 1964.

Look, I'm not saying Goldwater was a racist, but the CRA in 1964 was extremely important.  This actually broke the back of segregation in Southern cities.  Yes, Goldwater was a good civil rights advocate up until 1964.  I acknowledge that.

But my point is this.  The 1964 electoral map UNQUESTIONABLY shows that people in different parts of the country saw Goldwater much differently than Nixon.  Many racists DID go from never voting Republican to voting from Goldwater in 1964.  Just look at the MS and AL results for this year.  After Goldwater, the GOP nominated candidates who supported civil rights(though Nixon had a mixed record), but Goldwater unquestionably was the first instance in Presidential elections where racists in the Deep South began to really support the Republicans.  Nixon's Southern Strategy (more about campaigning than policy substance) and later Reagan (with an interruption by Carter) were able to win the south with significant margins.   Most people in the South are not racist, but many of those racists began to vote Republican in 1964 (then Dixiecrat in 1968, Republican in 1972 going forward). 

If Goldwater was not the 1964 nominee, the GOP would do much better among blacks and the history of civil rights would be much different with respect to the 2 parties.  Yes, Goldwater later opposed those Southern racists.  But he is arguably the catalyst for it.

[All Along The Watchtower]

It should be noted that the Republican Southern Strategy was (at least, in its early years) more about reaching out to a growing population of suburban middle-class whites (who would be inclined to vote Republican anyway outside the South as well, especially back then) than it was about reaching out to the staunch Dixiecratic strongholds in the rural poor areas.

[GaussLaw]

It should be noted that the Republican Southern Strategy was (at least, in its early years) more about reaching out to a growing population of suburban middle-class whites (who would be inclined to vote Republican anyway outside the South as well, especially back then) than it was about reaching out to the staunch Dixiecratic strongholds in the rural poor areas.

Good point again.  I am not saying the GOP was some racist entity or anything like that; my original post was just refuting Illini's statement that the GOP always opposed desegregation.

[The Mikado]

2016 will likely be the last year with a major party nominee who is openly anti-ssm,rather than some mealy mouthed position about "well, states should choose, but my state was right in joining the other 49 in passing it" nonsense that we'll be getting by 2020.

[Mr. Morden]

2016 will likely be the last year with a major party nominee who is openly anti-ssm,rather than some mealy mouthed position about "well, states should choose, but my state was right in joining the other 49 in passing it" nonsense that we'll be getting by 2020.

You don't think Bolton will be the 2016 GOP nominee? 

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=179526.0

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How "libertarian".

[Ogre Mage]

We will not let the public forget that the Republican Party was on the wrong side of history.

[Heimdal]

Barry Goldwater: the GOP can't "flip" and support desegregation

Someone needs to learn history.

GOPers were massively in favor of Civil Rights in the '50s and early '60s.

Goldwater tried to flip the party against it and racists gradually moved to the GOP since.

Someone needs to learn history.

Goldwater was massively in favor of Civil Rights in the 50s and 60s for the exception of laws like the CRA in 1964.

Fair point, but Goldwater supported civil rights less than virtually every other Republican at the time.  Most Republicans at that point had no problems with the CRA and voted for all of the other legislation Goldwater supported.  Goldwater's nomination led to whites in the Deep South beginning to vote Republican.  Note that racism overall has gone down for everyone, but the GOP is the more racist party now(in that more racists[at least against blacks] join it) largely because of Goldwater's nomination in 1964.

Absolutely not. Did Republicans fund the lawsuit for Brown V. Board or was it Goldwater? Did Republicans consistently donate to the NCAAP or was it Goldwater? Were Republicans consistently members of the NCAAP or was it Goldwater? Goldwater legitimately fought for civil rights more than any republican or dem for the exception of the CRA in 1964.

Look, I'm not saying Goldwater was a racist, but the CRA in 1964 was extremely important.  This actually broke the back of segregation in Southern cities.  Yes, Goldwater was a good civil rights advocate up until 1964.  I acknowledge that.

But my point is this.  The 1964 electoral map UNQUESTIONABLY shows that people in different parts of the country saw Goldwater much differently than Nixon.  Many racists DID go from never voting Republican to voting from Goldwater in 1964.  Just look at the MS and AL results for this year.  After Goldwater, the GOP nominated candidates who supported civil rights(though Nixon had a mixed record), but Goldwater unquestionably was the first instance in Presidential elections where racists in the Deep South began to really support the Republicans.  Nixon's Southern Strategy (more about campaigning than policy substance) and later Reagan (with an interruption by Carter) were able to win the south with significant margins.   Most people in the South are not racist, but many of those racists began to vote Republican in 1964 (then Dixiecrat in 1968, Republican in 1972 going forward). 

If Goldwater was not the 1964 nominee, the GOP would do much better among blacks and the history of civil rights would be much different with respect to the 2 parties.  Yes, Goldwater later opposed those Southern racists.  But he is arguably the catalyst for it.

To be fair, a lot of racist Southern whites probably did support the Democratic nominee in 1976. Carter did to some extent try to play both sides of the fence in 1976 (sort of like Nixon before him).