WaPo: The GOP is no party for blacks, Latinos, and gays

[Badger]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Didn't Obama say he was running on revenge?

No, ftr.

[Badger]

I just don't get it. Since Democrats were the party of slavery 150 yeras ago, and southern Democrats like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Trent Lott fought the Civil Rights bills in the mid-60's, why do minorities now vote overwhelmingly for even white Democrats?? Granted Thurmond and his ilk had strong strong support from now widely-discredited Republicans like Reagan and Goldwater, but surely minorities recall how the northern moderate wing, ably represented in recent years by folks like Arlen Specter and Jim Jeffords, supported civil rights legislation thenn

I just don't get it?!? I guess Oldiesfreak and Ben Kenobi are right: Minority voters are mostly political sheep who listen to their leaders blindly and can't rationally discern their own interests.

[Badger]

First of all, race may have been a factor in 1964, but it wasn't after that. 

Yes, that's right! After LBJ signed the civil rights act, we all held hands and danced around the camp fire!  MLK was never shot!  The KKK disbanded!  It was just a random coincidence that Obama was black, and somehow underperformed Kerry in Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia, and..... 

Obama underperformed Kerry in E. Kentucky and West Virginia because of his perceived hostility to coal.  Likewise, the only congressional district in America to vote for Kerry in 2004 and McCain in 2008 was in SW PA right in the heart of coal country?

while I agree Obama's underperformance in southern Wv and eastern KY had notably more to do with coal than race, PA-12 has relatively little coal-related employment and doesn't support your theory.

On another note, if you're going to try to sell a southern strategy revisionist historian as a 'liberal', you may not want to claim that for an article published in freakin' National Review. That is only SLIGHTLY mor compelling than your citing Pat Buchanan to claim there was never any race-based southern strategy.

[Badger]

I just don't get it. Since Democrats were the party of slavery 150 yeras ago, and southern Democrats like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Trent Lott fought the Civil Rights bills in the mid-60's, why do minorities now vote overwhelmingly for even white Democrats?? Granted Thurmond and his ilk had strong strong support from now widely-discredited Republicans like Reagan and Goldwater, but surely minorities recall how the northern moderate wing, ably represented in recent years by folks like Arlen Specter and Jim Jeffords, supported civil rights legislation thenn

I just don't get it?!? I guess Oldiesfreak and Ben Kenobi are right: Minority voters are mostly political sheep who listen to their leaders blindly and can't rationally discern their own interests.

Strom Thurmond was the only major segregationist to become a Republican, and Reagan and Goldwater were both strong supporters of civil rights who opposed the 1964 CRA because of questions over its constitutionality. (Goldwater was a founding member of the Arizona NAACP and was instrumental in making his family's business one of the first in the state to desegregate.  Reagan also supported the 1964 CRA, stating that it "should be enforced at gunpoint if necessary.")  Trent Lott and Jesse Helms weren't even in politics much until the 70s.  I don't think Trent Lott was a fan of segregation necessarily, despite his statements at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party (which I think were mostly taken out of context.) 

I know, Oldies! I completely agree your post excapsulates the truth without an ounce of missing nuance or historical revisionism. Hence I agree with your and Kenobi's fundamental premise that minorities are overwhelmingly (near-universally among African-Americans) blindly ignoring history in supporting the racist Democrats rather than the true protectors of civil rigths, Romney's GOP.

[Badger]

Sheesh, just pull up any Dem map after the Civil War.

EXCELLENT point regarding the 201912 election, Ben!

[Badger]

Le sigh, this is so absurd.

Instead of living in the past, why don't you guys, y'know, actually do something to gain the faith of minorities?

Just a thought.

This sir, is the GOP! My party is more than content to hope for 2010-level turnout, aided by firmly opposing de-lilyfying 'amnesty' immigration and other 'anti-vote fraud' measures. That and telling Afr8can-Americans that the Emancipation Proclimation and the fact seregationists 50+ years ago we're overwhelmingly Democratic should enntitle us to a 20-30% share of their vote.


That, or we'l eventually get a clue.

[Badger]

No act. I'm a Republican, albeit definitely in the moderate wing on most issues.

[Badger]

I just don't get it. Since Democrats were the party of slavery 150 yeras ago, and southern Democrats like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Trent Lott fought the Civil Rights bills in the mid-60's, why do minorities now vote overwhelmingly for even white Democrats?? Granted Thurmond and his ilk had strong strong support from now widely-discredited Republicans like Reagan and Goldwater, but surely minorities recall how the northern moderate wing, ably represented in recent years by folks like Arlen Specter and Jim Jeffords, supported civil rights legislation thenn

I just don't get it?!? I guess Oldiesfreak and Ben Kenobi are right: Minority voters are mostly political sheep who listen to their leaders blindly and can't rationally discern their own interests.

Strom Thurmond was the only major segregationist to become a Republican, and Reagan and Goldwater were both strong supporters of civil rights who opposed the 1964 CRA because of questions over its constitutionality. (Goldwater was a founding member of the Arizona NAACP and was instrumental in making his family's business one of the first in the state to desegregate.  Reagan also supported the 1964 CRA, stating that it "should be enforced at gunpoint if necessary.")  Trent Lott and Jesse Helms weren't even in politics much until the 70s.  I don't think Trent Lott was a fan of segregation necessarily, despite his statements at Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party (which I think were mostly taken out of context.) 

I know, Oldies! I completely agree your post excapsulates the truth without an ounce of missing nuance or historical revisionism. Hence I agree with your and Kenobi's fundamental premise that minorities are overwhelmingly (near-universally among African-Americans) blindly ignoring history in supporting the racist Democrats rather than the true protectors of civil rigths, Romney's GOP.

I don't think Democrats are necessarily racist now, but they do have a long history of racism.

Oh I agree. The problem is the Democratic Party's racism is concentrated in about a century ago.

[Badger]

Southern white racists did not join the party between 1964 and 1968.  They may have voted for Goldwater in 1964, but after that, they went right back to voting Democrat, as evidenced by George Wallace running in 1968 (albeit as an Independent) and candidates like George Mahoney, Herman Talmadge, and Lester Maddox.  You seem like a smart guy; does being a member of one party and voting for one candidate of the opposing party suddenly make you a member of that person's party?  

Obviously, it's more complicated than one party was racist or the other party was racist.  Basically, the white establishment in the South was historically part of the Democratic party and they were historically racist.  But, they weren't racist because they were Democrats.  

Outside the South during the 50s-70s, the Democrats were more supportive of civil rights than Republicans.  If you take out the South, a higher percentage of Democrats voted for the civil rights act in Congress. Or look at Harry Truman desegregating the military.  Or just look at the black vote during this time.  Democrats won the black vote for President every time by a large margin.

Post 1972, direct appeals to racism and segregation were a net negative for politicians at the national level.  Neither party was going to repeal the civil rights act, segregation was over as a political issue.  Racism still existed though.  Republicans made inroads with white votes in the South during the 70s-90s mainly by playing up morals/family values issues and anti-Communism.  However, some Republicans also used racist appeals and talked about "state's rights."  Not a huge percentage of racist whites changed their registration to Republicans.  But, the gains Republicans made in the South were among the white racist establishment and not blacks, the Wallace voters, not the Humphrey voters.  

"State's rights" was not used by Republicans as a code word.  By then, nobody wanted to bring segregation back, so there were clearly no racist appeals in that.

You do the truth no favors by pretending that "nobody wanted to bring segregation back" when there are still people who would love segregation today. After all, over 40% of Alabama voters cast a ballot in support of an interracial marriage ban as recently as 2000.

And has been shown, that constituted a scintila of black voters.....and about 50% of whites.