Rightwinger’s ‘Southern Strategy’ Theory is .

[PoliticalChic]

I would also suggest that we all try to write for clarity and avoid ambiguity. If one has to go on to "explain" what one was trying to say in an earlier post, I think that would tend to indicate that the first post wasn't written well enough to begin with. It's sort of like jokes... if you have to explain the punch line to your audience, the joke probably needed to be reworked before it went into the act in the first place. And that's fine... but trying to defend the poorly written joke and trying instead to put the onus on the audience is just not good form.

In your case, PC... if you had simply said, "oh... I can see how I was unclear. I should have stated that, as a percentage of their total caucuses, republicans were more supportive of the civil rights act than democrats at that time, because, back then, the racists in America were primarily in the democratic party and primarily in the south... unlike today", you would have won accolades from all sides for your forthright honesty instead of the catcalls from the left for your obviously inarticulate and inaccurate statement.

1. It was clear.
"If one has to go on to "explain" what one was trying to say...."
I did no such thing. I merely highlighted your lacuna in the area of the English language.
It may, in fact, reflect the admission standards in our respective alma maters.

2. If you have a problem understanding words in the future, I suggest you avail yourself of a dictionary.


3. "if you had simply said, oh... I can see how I was unclear. I should have stated that, blah blah blah...." has the strong aroma of an excuse.

4. "...you would have won accolades from all sides for your forthright honesty instead of the catcalls from the left..."

By what stretch of imagination have you come up with the bizarre idea that I have any fear...much less of the Left???
As the old saying goes....'One can only judge others by oneself.'
Clearly you haven't seen many of my OP's.

 

[expatriate]

However, it wasn't clear. How can your statement be clear when it is also clear and FACTUAL that 199 is substantially more than 163?

 

[PoliticalChic]

However, it wasn't clear. How can your statement be clear when it is also clear and FACTUAL that 199 is substantially more than 163?

Some sort of sense of inadequacy in play here?
You keep making the same point.

I understand your statement that it wasn't clear.
Of course, it was and remains FACTUAL that a higher percentage of Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act, than Democrats.
Substantially so.

In any case, it defeats the idea of the Republicans behaving as segregationists.
Therefore, one should ask why
a. blacks vote Democrat....and I've provided the answer.
and
b. many white southerners left the Democrat Party...and I've provided that answer, too.

You use that as an excuse to explain your being wrong on the issue....
OK....feel better?

Fine.

 

[expatriate]

However, it wasn't clear. How can your statement be clear when it is also clear and FACTUAL that 199 is substantially more than 163?

Some sort of sense of inadequacy in play here?
You keep making the same point.

I understand your statement that it wasn't clear.
Of course, it was and remains FACTUAL that a higher percentage of Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act, than Democrats.
Substantially so.

In any case, it defeats the idea of the Republicans behaving as segregationists.
Therefore, one should ask why
a. blacks vote Democrat....and I've provided the answer.
and
b. many white southerners left the Democrat Party...and I've provided that answer, too.

You use that as an excuse to explain your being wrong on the issue....
OK....feel better?

Fine.

I feel no sense of inadequacy whatsoever. I merely pointed out that your original point #4 was not accurate as originally written. It does remain factual that a higher percentage of republicans in congress voted for the CFR, but, in fact, that is not what you originally said. It was what I suggested you might amend your point to say, and I am pleased that you have taken my advice. You're welcome, by the way. Isn't it nice when left and right can come together and find common ground?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Political Chick is not clear in not telling you that southern GOP senators and reps voted in greater numbers against the Civil Rights and Voting acts.

She, like many slow brains, has difficulty in understand that the LBJ-led and Democrat dominated legislation was based on geography first, then party.

She is slow that way.

 

[gipper]

Political Chick is not clear in not telling you that southern GOP senators and reps voted in greater numbers against the Civil Rights and Voting acts.

She, like many slow brains, has difficulty in understand that the LBJ-led and Democrat dominated legislation was based on geography first, then party.

She is slow that way.

Your post is not correct...like most of your posts. And it does not refute the facts laid out in PC's posts EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE.

And who is slow?

If you knew history, you would know that very few Rs held office in the South in 1964. House and Senate seats throughout the South was dominated by Ds. So, how could the Southern Rs have voted against the Act in GREATER NUMBERS, as you stated?

Why do you persist in posting comments that are so easily proven erroneous?

By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[expatriate]

Political Chick is not clear in not telling you that southern GOP senators and reps voted in greater numbers against the Civil Rights and Voting acts.

She, like many slow brains, has difficulty in understand that the LBJ-led and Democrat dominated legislation was based on geography first, then party.

She is slow that way.

Your post is not correct...like most of your posts. And it does not refute the facts laid out in PC's posts EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE.

And who is slow?

If you knew history, you would know that very few Rs held office in the South in 1964. House and Senate seats throughout the South was dominated by Ds. So, how could the Southern Rs have voted against the Act in GREATER NUMBERS, as you stated?

Why do you persist in posting comments that are so easily proven erroneous?

By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I do think it is also interesting to note that northern democrats supported the CRA percentage-wise SUBSTANTIALLY more than northern republicans. I wonder what those 29 northern republican congressmen and senators were thinking when they cast their votes against civil rights for black Americans? Sons of the south, you can't excuse it, but you can sort of understand where they got their racism... but sons of the NORTH? What were they thinking? Perhaps they were just visionary and had anticipated Nixon's southern strategy and decided to get on the bandwagon early.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The liars support each other, gipper backing Political Chick.

Once again, in the SOUTH, GOP senators and reps by a greater % voted against Civil Rights and Voting acts than did Dems.

The issue was that the Democratic-generated and -led legislation first of all was geographic-centered and then only was it political.

 

[rightwinger]

The liars support each other, gipper backing Political Chick.

Once again, in the SOUTH, GOP senators and reps by a greater % voted against Civil Rights and Voting acts than did Dems.

The issue was that the Democratic-generated and -led legislation first of all was geographic-centered and then only was it political.

In the south you could not get elected dog catcher if you supported civil rights. Both Democrats and Republicans in the South opposed civil rights

 

[gipper]

The liars support each other, gipper backing Political Chick.

Once again, in the SOUTH, GOP senators and reps by a greater % voted against Civil Rights and Voting acts than did Dems.

The issue was that the Democratic-generated and -led legislation first of all was geographic-centered and then only was it political.

You really are slow...but then I knew that....

Please TRY to comprehend the ACTUAL votes below...and then tell me again how it could be that Southern Rs voted AGAINST the Act in HIGHER NUMBERS than did the Ds????? too funny......

By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[rightwinger]

The liars support each other, gipper backing Political Chick.

Once again, in the SOUTH, GOP senators and reps by a greater % voted against Civil Rights and Voting acts than did Dems.

The issue was that the Democratic-generated and -led legislation first of all was geographic-centered and then only was it political.

You really are slow...but then I knew that....

Please TRY to comprehend the ACTUAL votes below...and then tell me again how it could be that Southern Rs voted AGAINST the Act in HIGHER NUMBERS than did the Ds????? too funny......

By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the post. It only proves what we have been saying. Civil Rights was a north/south issue and was not decided by party

If you insist on making it a Democrat/Republican issue, you can see that eight southern Democrats voted in favor of Civil rights while not a single Southern Republican voted in favor ( out of 11)

 

[expatriate]

Ark. GOP calls candidates' statements 'offensive' - Yahoo! News

a cute little article that clearly displays how some of the southern GOP's finest view race in America.

proud republicans.

and they WONDER why blacks vote for democrats 90% of the time??????

 

[JakeStarkey]

gipper, 11 Southern democrats voted for, 0 Southern pubs voted for.

This was a geography thing led by the dems.

What don't you get?

The liars support each other, gipper backing Political Chick.

Once again, in the SOUTH, GOP senators and reps by a greater % voted against Civil Rights and Voting acts than did Dems.

The issue was that the Democratic-generated and -led legislation first of all was geographic-centered and then only was it political.

You really are slow...but then I knew that....

Please TRY to comprehend the ACTUAL votes below...and then tell me again how it could be that Southern Rs voted AGAINST the Act in HIGHER NUMBERS than did the Ds????? too funny......

By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the post. It only proves what we have been saying. Civil Rights was a north/south issue and was not decided by party

If you insist on making it a Democrat/Republican issue, you can see that eight southern Democrats voted in favor of Civil rights while not a single Southern Republican voted in favor ( out of 11)

 

[gipper]

gipper, 11 Southern democrats voted for, 0 Southern pubs voted for.

This was a geography thing led by the dems.

What don't you get?

You really are slow...but then I knew that....

Please TRY to comprehend the ACTUAL votes below...and then tell me again how it could be that Southern Rs voted AGAINST the Act in HIGHER NUMBERS than did the Ds????? too funny......

By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for the post. It only proves what we have been saying. Civil Rights was a north/south issue and was not decided by party

If you insist on making it a Democrat/Republican issue, you can see that eight southern Democrats voted in favor of Civil rights while not a single Southern Republican voted in favor ( out of 11)

I do so enjoy pulling your chain....

 

[JakeStarkey]

You finally understood it, gipper!

Yay!!

Thanks for admitting you had lost from the beginning.

Good of you.