Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Sorry, pal.
That's the Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Moderation.
IM2 is a raging racist and yet represents the platform of the Left, pretty well.
NO one of any relevance on the Right is pushing anything like the hate and demand for racial oppression that is found on the Left.
You accuse me of racism and can't prove it. That's an example of how the racist right does things
You support anti-white discrimination today to make up for past disadvantages of minorities.
That is racism.
There is no anti white discrimination to support.
One example has been repeatedly proven to you, and your stonewalling just reveals you to be a DISHONEST racist.
You were asked to show the government policy of anti white discrimination. You showed no example of that. A Princeton study is not a policy. And a study of 8 Ivy League schools which shows whites were the majority of students does not show a national policy of anti white discrimination. If you think this is the case, then you are extremely dumb. Or just a plain ol white racist piece of lying crap.
OK. You know what they are and you know what republicans are doing. So don't ask stupid ass questions then claim that because you didn't get the answer you wanted that the policies do not exist.
I do know the answers. I've asked this question of libs many times.
There are no such policies.
It is a massive lie.
Unfortunately for you it's the truth.
Says the man that still has not listed the policies.
Because he can't.
Because it is a massive lie.
Coming from a man??? who can't produce the American governments policy of anti white discrimination.
You are behaving just as I predicted.
OK. You know what they are and you know what republicans are doing. So don't ask stupid ass questions then claim that because you didn't get the answer you wanted that the policies do not exist.
NOpe.
The vast majority of the time I ask libs to back up their claim that the GOP "wooed" racist southerns,
I do not get any real answers, just dodges and deflections like you are doing now.
On rare occasions, some lib is stupid enough to try to back up his shit.
And the best they can come up with is claiming that there were "code words" and that that is what flipped half the nation for generations.
Libs are pathetic.
There are no policies.
That is why you can't answer.
You accuse me of racism and can't prove it. That's an example of how the racist right does things
You support anti-white discrimination today to make up for past disadvantages of minorities.
That is racism.
There is no anti white discrimination to support.
One example has been repeatedly proven to you, and your stonewalling just reveals you to be a DISHONEST racist.
You were asked to show the government policy of anti white discrimination. You showed no example of that. A Princeton study is not a policy. And a study of 8 Ivy League schools which shows whites were the majority of students does not show a national policy of anti white discrimination. If you think this is the case, then you are extremely dumb. Or just a plain ol white racist piece of lying crap.
The policies using lawyer bullshit to sugar coat their true intent.
I have showed you hard data on what the actual impact of the polices are.
And it is pure racial discrimination.
Which is WHY you support it.
Your continued pretense of being too stupid to understand proportions is noted and laughed at, and then dismissed.
I do know the answers. I've asked this question of libs many times.
There are no such policies.
It is a massive lie.
Unfortunately for you it's the truth.
Says the man that still has not listed the policies.
Because he can't.
Because it is a massive lie.
Coming from a man??? who can't produce the American governments policy of anti white discrimination.
You are behaving just as I predicted.
OK. You know what they are and you know what republicans are doing. So don't ask stupid ass questions then claim that because you didn't get the answer you wanted that the policies do not exist.
NOpe.
The vast majority of the time I ask libs to back up their claim that the GOP "wooed" racist southerns,
I do not get any real answers, just dodges and deflections like you are doing now.
On rare occasions, some lib is stupid enough to try to back up his shit.
And the best they can come up with is claiming that there were "code words" and that that is what flipped half the nation for generations.
Libs are pathetic.
There are no policies.
That is why you can't answer.
Are you for states rights?
You support anti-white discrimination today to make up for past disadvantages of minorities.
That is racism.
There is no anti white discrimination to support.
One example has been repeatedly proven to you, and your stonewalling just reveals you to be a DISHONEST racist.
You were asked to show the government policy of anti white discrimination. You showed no example of that. A Princeton study is not a policy. And a study of 8 Ivy League schools which shows whites were the majority of students does not show a national policy of anti white discrimination. If you think this is the case, then you are extremely dumb. Or just a plain ol white racist piece of lying crap.
The policies using lawyer bullshit to sugar coat their true intent.
I have showed you hard data on what the actual impact of the polices are.
And it is pure racial discrimination.
Which is WHY you support it.
Your continued pretense of being too stupid to understand proportions is noted and laughed at, and then dismissed.
You have not shown jack shit . Now shut the hell up about it since you aren't going to show the government policy because we all know it does not exist.
There is no anti white discrimination to support.
One example has been repeatedly proven to you, and your stonewalling just reveals you to be a DISHONEST racist.
You were asked to show the government policy of anti white discrimination. You showed no example of that. A Princeton study is not a policy. And a study of 8 Ivy League schools which shows whites were the majority of students does not show a national policy of anti white discrimination. If you think this is the case, then you are extremely dumb. Or just a plain ol white racist piece of lying crap.
The policies using lawyer bullshit to sugar coat their true intent.
I have showed you hard data on what the actual impact of the polices are.
And it is pure racial discrimination.
Which is WHY you support it.
Your continued pretense of being too stupid to understand proportions is noted and laughed at, and then dismissed.
You have not shown jack shit . Now shut the hell up about it since you aren't going to show the government policy because we all know it does not exist.
I address your point. You ignore the response to your point, and reassertion your previous position.
That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion and your point is invalid and you lose.
Now is the time to end republican lies that claim blacks need to be republicans because the republican party is the party of racial equality and democrats are racists. Because most of the wites here are racist republicans and refuse to talk about anyhig past slavey so they can fill bandwidth full of excuses about who they didn't own, we will look at some of the political aspects of those 100 years.
1. Republicans and Democrats after the Civil War
It’s true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. It’s also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But there’s more to it.
The Civil War-era GOP wasn’t that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding, and monopolizing the new black vote.
In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.
2. Democrats v Republicans on Jim Crow
Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.
During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies — it wasn’t worth their while.
3. President Truman Integrates the Troops: 1948
Black people are still living in segregation under Jim Crow. Nonetheless, African Americans agree to serve in World War II.
At war’s end, President Harry Truman, a Democrat, used an Executive Order to integrate the troops. (That order was not executed until 1963, however because: racism.)
How Republicans and Democrats switched on civil rights
Now as you continue reading you will see the usual lines republicans here have used to build their disingenuous argument.
Definition of disingenuous
: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness
So while we see that may democrats at that time opposed civil rights, what these repubicans wll not say is this:
In fact, a greater percentage of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats. Support for the Act followed geographic, not party, lines.
Soon after, the Republicans came up with their Southern Strategy — a plan to woo white Southern voters to the party for the 1968 election.
The Kennedy and Johnson administrations had advanced civil rights, largely through national legislation and direct executive actions. So, the Southern Strategy was the opposite — states’ rights and no integration.
As in the Civil War, the concepts of “states’ rights” and “tradition,” were codes for “maintaining white supremacy.”
Starting with Thurmond in 1964, and continuing throughout the Johnson and Nixon administrations, Dixiecrats left the Democrats for the Republicans.
Those Racist Dixiecrats Create Mainstream Republican Policy
By the time they left the Democrats, Dixiecrats Thurmond and Representative (later Senator) Jesse Helms were on the fringes of their party.
But their ideas formed modern GOP’s core platform.
In a campaign ad, Democrat-turned-Republican Jesse Helms said “racial quotas” prevented white people from getting jobs. The lie of racial quotas persists in the GOP’s rejection of affirmative action. Racial quotas are illegal.
So if I am black and know all this, which is why I won't be a republican, what makes these racists think millions of other blacks do not know the same thing? So just exactly who is trying to trick who? What party is trying to get blacks to support policies diametrically opposed to our best interests? The democrats do not believe that blacks can only make it if liberals give us government help. They believe than when you need help, the government should be able to help you. And since I pay hard earned tax money, I do expect more in return than troops stationed overseas while our government pays to help the poor in nations they use the military to blow up whilr paying to create jobs in foreign lands.
Now is the time to end republican lies that claim blacks need to be republicans because the republican party is the party of racial equality and democrats are racists. Because most of the wites here are racist republicans and refuse to talk about anyhig past slavey so they can fill bandwidth full of excuses about who they didn't own, we will look at some of the political aspects of those 100 years.
1. Republicans and Democrats after the Civil War
It’s true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. It’s also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But there’s more to it.
The Civil War-era GOP wasn’t that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding, and monopolizing the new black vote.
In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.
2. Democrats v Republicans on Jim Crow
Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.
During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies — it wasn’t worth their while.
3. President Truman Integrates the Troops: 1948
Black people are still living in segregation under Jim Crow. Nonetheless, African Americans agree to serve in World War II.
At war’s end, President Harry Truman, a Democrat, used an Executive Order to integrate the troops. (That order was not executed until 1963, however because: racism.)
How Republicans and Democrats switched on civil rights
Now as you continue reading you will see the usual lines republicans here have used to build their disingenuous argument.
Definition of disingenuous
: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness
So while we see that may democrats at that time opposed civil rights, what these repubicans wll not say is this:
In fact, a greater percentage of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats. Support for the Act followed geographic, not party, lines.
Soon after, the Republicans came up with their Southern Strategy — a plan to woo white Southern voters to the party for the 1968 election.
The Kennedy and Johnson administrations had advanced civil rights, largely through national legislation and direct executive actions. So, the Southern Strategy was the opposite — states’ rights and no integration.
As in the Civil War, the concepts of “states’ rights” and “tradition,” were codes for “maintaining white supremacy.”
Starting with Thurmond in 1964, and continuing throughout the Johnson and Nixon administrations, Dixiecrats left the Democrats for the Republicans.
Those Racist Dixiecrats Create Mainstream Republican Policy
By the time they left the Democrats, Dixiecrats Thurmond and Representative (later Senator) Jesse Helms were on the fringes of their party.
But their ideas formed modern GOP’s core platform.
In a campaign ad, Democrat-turned-Republican Jesse Helms said “racial quotas” prevented white people from getting jobs. The lie of racial quotas persists in the GOP’s rejection of affirmative action. Racial quotas are illegal.
So if I am black and know all this, which is why I won't be a republican, what makes these racists think millions of other blacks do not know the same thing? So just exactly who is trying to trick who? What party is trying to get blacks to support policies diametrically opposed to our best interests? The democrats do not believe that blacks can only make it if liberals give us government help. They believe than when you need help, the government should be able to help you. And since I pay hard earned tax money, I do expect more in return than troops stationed overseas while our government pays to help the poor in nations they use the military to blow up whilr paying to create jobs in foreign lands.
Zzzzzz only 2 dixiecrats left the party, the rest remained, Carter won the south so saying the party's switched is bullshit ..
The younger southerners wanted factory jobs and the republicans delivered .
One example has been repeatedly proven to you, and your stonewalling just reveals you to be a DISHONEST racist.
You were asked to show the government policy of anti white discrimination. You showed no example of that. A Princeton study is not a policy. And a study of 8 Ivy League schools which shows whites were the majority of students does not show a national policy of anti white discrimination. If you think this is the case, then you are extremely dumb. Or just a plain ol white racist piece of lying crap.
The policies using lawyer bullshit to sugar coat their true intent.
I have showed you hard data on what the actual impact of the polices are.
And it is pure racial discrimination.
Which is WHY you support it.
Your continued pretense of being too stupid to understand proportions is noted and laughed at, and then dismissed.
You have not shown jack shit . Now shut the hell up about it since you aren't going to show the government policy because we all know it does not exist.
I address your point. You ignore the response to your point, and reassertion your previous position.
That is the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion and your point is invalid and you lose.
.And that's all you've ever done. You assert anti white discrimination- no proof, but you continue to assert that it happens.
Allen Clifton
Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University.
Here are 3 Things That Prove, Without a Doubt, That the Modern Day GOP is Built on Racism
While most rational people recognize that the modern day Republican party is built on racism,....
1. The “Southern strategy”: If you’ve never heard of this term, it was basically a calculated effort by Richard Nixon to seize on white racism in the South by pandering to Democrats who felt betrayed by the Democratic party as it embraced equality, civil rights and moved away from its racist roots. In fact, here’s a direct quote from Nixon’s political strategist he gave during an interview in 1970:
From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.
While Republicans will certainly try to spin such comments, it’s pretty hard to do that when you combine the reality of the “Southern strategy” with the next to points I’m about to make.
2. While many Republicans will deny that the Civil War was about racism and slavery, whenever Republicans are accused of being racists, they often cite being the “party of Lincoln” in an attempt to “prove” they’re not racists: Tell me, if the Civil War wasn’t about racism and slavery (as many modern day Republicans claim it wasn’t), then why does “being the party of Lincoln” matter when people accuse the GOP of being built on racism? The truth is, if racism and slavery weren’t the driving forces behind the Civil War, as many on the right argue, then being the “party of Lincoln” shouldn’t matter one bit when either topic is discussed.
Yet, if you bring up either topic, you’re almost guaranteed to get Republicans reaching back over 150 years to “prove” that their party isn’t driven by racial ignorance — despite the fact that nearly all of these former Confederate states (most of which supported segregation, as well) are all now “red states.”
3. As the Democratic party began to embrace civil rights and equality, three very well-known racists and segregationists who were once Democrats abandoned the party — becoming Republicans: It is undeniable that three of the most well-known racists and segregationists of the last 50+ years were George Wallace, Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms. At one point, all three men were proud members of the Democratic party. However, by 1970, all three men had
become members of the GOP.
But… but, why?
Why would three racist men, who were still devout segregationists, leave the supposed “racist” party (Democrats) to join the “party of Lincoln and equality” (Republicans) around the same time the Civil Rights Act was signed into law by LBJ — a Democrat?
That doesn’t make any sense. If Democrats were still the party of racism, bigotry and segregation (as Republicans claim it still is today), while the GOP is the party of equality (as Republicans claim it is today), why would three men who vehemently opposed civil rights, desegregation and equality join the Republican party?
.
Allen Clifton
Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University.
Here are 3 Things That Prove, Without a Doubt, That the Modern Day GOP is Built on Racism
While most rational people recognize that the modern day Republican party is built on racism,....
This is one of the reasons is sucks to talk to liberals today. They pepper their statements, with partisan filler that serves no purpose but to be propaganda.
If you take the time to refute each unsupported statement they constantly spew, then ever single discuss, just grinds to a halt, and immediately goes off topic. This makes rational, productive discussion impossible. Their goal obviously.
If you don't, the lies they spew gain a false aura of credibility to the uninformed, because they are always out there, and never challenged.
1. The “Southern strategy”: If you’ve never heard of this term, it was basically a calculated effort by Richard Nixon to seize on white racism in the South by pandering to Democrats who felt betrayed by the Democratic party as it embraced equality, civil rights and moved away from its racist roots. In fact, here’s a direct quote from Nixon’s political strategist he gave during an interview in 1970:
From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.
While Republicans will certainly try to spin such comments, it’s pretty hard to do that when you combine the reality of the “Southern strategy” with the next to points I’m about to make.
Except that that is not what happened, not even close. THe blacks switched parties decades, generations earlier than that, and it did not bother the whites in the South one bit (or at least not enough to effect their voting)
Blacks and the Democratic Party - FactCheck.org
"Q: When did blacks start voting Democratic?
A: There was a big move to Democratic voting in Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration, and another in Lyndon B. Johnson’s.
FULL QUESTION
I’ve had a question for a long time and haven’t yet found what I consider to be an unbiased source, or the raw data to do my own analysis.
For how long have the Democrats garnered the black vote? Certainly there was a point during the last century when a majority of blacks started supporting the Democrats rather than Republicans. What has been the voting pattern and what happened to change that pattern?
FULL ANSWER
Blacks mostly voted Republican from after the Civil War and through the early part of the 20th century. That’s not surprising when one considers that Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president, and the white, segregationist politicians who governed Southern states in those days were Democrats. The Democratic Party didn’t welcome blacks then, and it wasn’t until 1924 that blacks were even permitted to attend Democratic conventions in any official capacity. Most blacks lived in the South, where they were mostly prevented from voting at all....
The election of Roosevelt in 1932 marked the beginning of a change. He got 71 percent of the black vote for president in 1936 and did nearly that well in the next two elections, according to historical figures kept by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. But even then, the number of blacks identifying themselves as Republicans was about the same as the number who thought of themselves as Democrats.
It wasn’t until Harry Truman garnered 77 percent of the black vote in 1948 that a majority of blacks reported that they thought of themselves as Democrats. Earlier that year Truman had issued an order desegregating the armed services and an executive order setting up regulations against racial bias in federal employment."
Nineteen, thirty FUCKING TWO.
2. While many Republicans will deny that the Civil War was about racism and slavery, whenever Republicans are accused of being racists, they often cite being the “party of Lincoln” in an attempt to “prove” they’re not racists: Tell me, if the Civil War wasn’t about racism and slavery (as many modern day Republicans claim it wasn’t), then why does “being the party of Lincoln” matter when people accuse the GOP of being built on racism? The truth is, if racism and slavery weren’t the driving forces behind the Civil War, as many on the right argue, then being the “party of Lincoln” shouldn’t matter one bit when either topic is discussed.
That doesn't follow for a number of reasons.
A pov, I've heard often, one I do not share, is that Lincoln fought the Civil War to "preserve the Union" and that the Emancipation was separate policy, done to avoid having the South get foreign support.
Thus the War could be about preserving the Union, taxes, trade ect, but Lincoln still was the one to free the slaves.
Again, this is not a view I support, but the people I'v heard make it, are able to find plenty of statements from Lincoln to support it.
And these people are just as likely to be lefties, often BLACK lefties, as they are to be white Southern republicans.
It's a complex historical argument, and the reasons people reach various conclusions are very complex and varied.
To just blanket assume racism, is the act of a lazy self serving asshole.
Yet, if you bring up either topic, you’re almost guaranteed to get Republicans reaching back over 150 years to “prove” that their party isn’t driven by racial ignorance — despite the fact that nearly all of these former Confederate states (most of which supported segregation, as well) are all now “red states.”
Really? REALLY?
This fucking asshole, is citing the CIVIL FUCKING WAR, from 1865, from 150 years ago, as evidence of modern republican "racism"
and he includes in his article, a preemptive dismissal and marginalization of any discussion of the event he is citing.
That's utter bullshit. And representative of the bullshit that liberals believe, in order to protect their bullshit positions.
I've said it before, and I will now say it again.
Liberals: All the intellectual honesty of a crack whore.
3. As the Democratic party began to embrace civil rights and equality, three very well-known racists and segregationists who were once Democrats abandoned the party — becoming Republicans: It is undeniable that three of the most well-known racists and segregationists of the last 50+ years were George Wallace, Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms. At one point, all three men were proud members of the Democratic party. However, by 1970, all three men hadbecome members of the GOP.
But… but, why?
Why would three racist men, who were still devout segregationists, leave the supposed “racist” party (Democrats) to join the “party of Lincoln and equality” (Republicans) around the same time the Civil Rights Act was signed into law by LBJ — a Democrat?
That doesn’t make any sense. If Democrats were still the party of racism, bigotry and segregation (as Republicans claim it still is today), while the GOP is the party of equality (as Republicans claim it is today), why would three men who vehemently opposed civil rights, desegregation and equality join the Republican party?
1. George Wallace was a well know racist and segregationist. And he remained a democrat to the day he died.
George Wallace - Wikipedia
"In the late 1970s, Wallace announced that he was a born-again Christian and apologized to black civil rights leaders for his past actions as a segregationist. He said that while he had once sought power and glory, he realized he needed to seek love and forgiveness.[note 3] In 1979, Wallace said of his stand in the schoolhouse door: "I was wrong. Those days are over, and they ought to be over."[59] He publicly asked for forgiveness from African Americans.[59][60]
In the 1982 Alabama gubernatorial Democratic primary, Wallace's main opponents were Lieutenant Governor George McMillan and Alabama House Speaker Joe McCorquodale. In the primary, McCorquodale was eliminated, and the vote went to a runoff, with Wallace holding a slight edge over McMillan. Wallace won the Democratic nomination by a margin of 51 to 49 percent. In the general election, his opponent was Montgomery Republican Mayor Emory Folmar. Polling experts at first thought the 1982 election was the best chance since Reconstruction for a Republican to be elected as governor of Alabama.[citation needed] Ultimately, though, it was Wallace, not Folmar, who claimed victory.
During Wallace's final term as governor (1983–1987) he made a record number of black appointments to state positions,[61] including, for the first time, two black people as members in the same cabinet."
It is worth noting that, this article that smears the South as being so racist, ignored not only this tale of redemption, but also how well it sold in one of the most Southern States in the Deep South.
This is how George Wallace did in his final election, running on a platform of "asking forgiveness from African Americans" and appointing record numbers of blacks to state positions.
2. Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, on the other hand DID become and stay Republicans. The author asked why. He doesn't really support his assumption that it was racism.
3. It is also worth noting that strom and helms were TWO people. The rest of the southern dems, congressmen and voters, stayed dems for the rest of their lives. It was NEW voters, often moving from the North, the flipped the South. Not old voters changing sides. This has been well researched and documented.
from that right wing rag, the New York times.
The Myth of ‘the Southern Strategy’
"In the postwar era, they note, the South transformed itself from a backward region to an engine of the national economy, giving rise to a sizable new wealthy suburban class. This class, not surprisingly, began to vote for the party that best represented its economic interests: the G.O.P.
Working-class whites, however — and here’s the surprise — even those in areas with large black populations, stayed loyal to the Democrats. (This was true until the 90s, when the nation as a whole turned rightward in Congressional voting.)"...
V
.
Allen Clifton
Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University.
Here are 3 Things That Prove, Without a Doubt, That the Modern Day GOP is Built on Racism
While most rational people recognize that the modern day Republican party is built on racism,....
This is one of the reasons is sucks to talk to liberals today. They pepper their statements, with partisan filler that serves no purpose but to be propaganda.
If you take the time to refute each unsupported statement they constantly spew, then ever single discuss, just grinds to a halt, and immediately goes off topic. This makes rational, productive discussion impossible. Their goal obviously.
If you don't, the lies they spew gain a false aura of credibility to the uninformed, because they are always out there, and never challenged.
1. The “Southern strategy”: If you’ve never heard of this term, it was basically a calculated effort by Richard Nixon to seize on white racism in the South by pandering to Democrats who felt betrayed by the Democratic party as it embraced equality, civil rights and moved away from its racist roots. In fact, here’s a direct quote from Nixon’s political strategist he gave during an interview in 1970:
From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.
While Republicans will certainly try to spin such comments, it’s pretty hard to do that when you combine the reality of the “Southern strategy” with the next to points I’m about to make.
Except that that is not what happened, not even close. THe blacks switched parties decades, generations earlier than that, and it did not bother the whites in the South one bit (or at least not enough to effect their voting)
Blacks and the Democratic Party - FactCheck.org
"Q: When did blacks start voting Democratic?
A: There was a big move to Democratic voting in Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration, and another in Lyndon B. Johnson’s.
FULL QUESTION
I’ve had a question for a long time and haven’t yet found what I consider to be an unbiased source, or the raw data to do my own analysis.
For how long have the Democrats garnered the black vote? Certainly there was a point during the last century when a majority of blacks started supporting the Democrats rather than Republicans. What has been the voting pattern and what happened to change that pattern?
FULL ANSWER
Blacks mostly voted Republican from after the Civil War and through the early part of the 20th century. That’s not surprising when one considers that Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president, and the white, segregationist politicians who governed Southern states in those days were Democrats. The Democratic Party didn’t welcome blacks then, and it wasn’t until 1924 that blacks were even permitted to attend Democratic conventions in any official capacity. Most blacks lived in the South, where they were mostly prevented from voting at all....
The election of Roosevelt in 1932 marked the beginning of a change. He got 71 percent of the black vote for president in 1936 and did nearly that well in the next two elections, according to historical figures kept by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. But even then, the number of blacks identifying themselves as Republicans was about the same as the number who thought of themselves as Democrats.
It wasn’t until Harry Truman garnered 77 percent of the black vote in 1948 that a majority of blacks reported that they thought of themselves as Democrats. Earlier that year Truman had issued an order desegregating the armed services and an executive order setting up regulations against racial bias in federal employment."
Nineteen, thirty FUCKING TWO.
2. While many Republicans will deny that the Civil War was about racism and slavery, whenever Republicans are accused of being racists, they often cite being the “party of Lincoln” in an attempt to “prove” they’re not racists: Tell me, if the Civil War wasn’t about racism and slavery (as many modern day Republicans claim it wasn’t), then why does “being the party of Lincoln” matter when people accuse the GOP of being built on racism? The truth is, if racism and slavery weren’t the driving forces behind the Civil War, as many on the right argue, then being the “party of Lincoln” shouldn’t matter one bit when either topic is discussed.
That doesn't follow for a number of reasons.
A pov, I've heard often, one I do not share, is that Lincoln fought the Civil War to "preserve the Union" and that the Emancipation was separate policy, done to avoid having the South get foreign support.
Thus the War could be about preserving the Union, taxes, trade ect, but Lincoln still was the one to free the slaves.
Again, this is not a view I support, but the people I'v heard make it, are able to find plenty of statements from Lincoln to support it.
And these people are just as likely to be lefties, often BLACK lefties, as they are to be white Southern republicans.
It's a complex historical argument, and the reasons people reach various conclusions are very complex and varied.
To just blanket assume racism, is the act of a lazy self serving asshole.
Yet, if you bring up either topic, you’re almost guaranteed to get Republicans reaching back over 150 years to “prove” that their party isn’t driven by racial ignorance — despite the fact that nearly all of these former Confederate states (most of which supported segregation, as well) are all now “red states.”
Really? REALLY?
This fucking asshole, is citing the CIVIL FUCKING WAR, from 1865, from 150 years ago, as evidence of modern republican "racism"
and he includes in his article, a preemptive dismissal and marginalization of any discussion of the event he is citing.
That's utter bullshit. And representative of the bullshit that liberals believe, in order to protect their bullshit positions.
I've said it before, and I will now say it again.
Liberals: All the intellectual honesty of a crack whore.
3. As the Democratic party began to embrace civil rights and equality, three very well-known racists and segregationists who were once Democrats abandoned the party — becoming Republicans: It is undeniable that three of the most well-known racists and segregationists of the last 50+ years were George Wallace, Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms. At one point, all three men were proud members of the Democratic party. However, by 1970, all three men hadbecome members of the GOP.
But… but, why?
Why would three racist men, who were still devout segregationists, leave the supposed “racist” party (Democrats) to join the “party of Lincoln and equality” (Republicans) around the same time the Civil Rights Act was signed into law by LBJ — a Democrat?
That doesn’t make any sense. If Democrats were still the party of racism, bigotry and segregation (as Republicans claim it still is today), while the GOP is the party of equality (as Republicans claim it is today), why would three men who vehemently opposed civil rights, desegregation and equality join the Republican party?
1. George Wallace was a well know racist and segregationist. And he remained a democrat to the day he died.
George Wallace - Wikipedia
"In the late 1970s, Wallace announced that he was a born-again Christian and apologized to black civil rights leaders for his past actions as a segregationist. He said that while he had once sought power and glory, he realized he needed to seek love and forgiveness.[note 3] In 1979, Wallace said of his stand in the schoolhouse door: "I was wrong. Those days are over, and they ought to be over."[59] He publicly asked for forgiveness from African Americans.[59][60]
In the 1982 Alabama gubernatorial Democratic primary, Wallace's main opponents were Lieutenant Governor George McMillan and Alabama House Speaker Joe McCorquodale. In the primary, McCorquodale was eliminated, and the vote went to a runoff, with Wallace holding a slight edge over McMillan. Wallace won the Democratic nomination by a margin of 51 to 49 percent. In the general election, his opponent was Montgomery Republican Mayor Emory Folmar. Polling experts at first thought the 1982 election was the best chance since Reconstruction for a Republican to be elected as governor of Alabama.[citation needed] Ultimately, though, it was Wallace, not Folmar, who claimed victory.
During Wallace's final term as governor (1983–1987) he made a record number of black appointments to state positions,[61] including, for the first time, two black people as members in the same cabinet."
It is worth noting that, this article that smears the South as being so racist, ignored not only this tale of redemption, but also how well it sold in one of the most Southern States in the Deep South.
This is how George Wallace did in his final election, running on a platform of "asking forgiveness from African Americans" and appointing record numbers of blacks to state positions.
2. Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, on the other hand DID become and stay Republicans. The author asked why. He doesn't really support his assumption that it was racism.
3. It is also worth noting that strom and helms were TWO people. The rest of the southern dems, congressmen and voters, stayed dems for the rest of their lives. It was NEW voters, often moving from the North, the flipped the South. Not old voters changing sides. This has been well researched and documented.
from that right wing rag, the New York times.
The Myth of ‘the Southern Strategy’
"In the postwar era, they note, the South transformed itself from a backward region to an engine of the national economy, giving rise to a sizable new wealthy suburban class. This class, not surprisingly, began to vote for the party that best represented its economic interests: the G.O.P.
Working-class whites, however — and here’s the surprise — even those in areas with large black populations, stayed loyal to the Democrats. (This was true until the 90s, when the nation as a whole turned rightward in Congressional voting.)"...
V
Bullshit. We all see what the republican party of today is. George Wallace was not nominated for president by the democratic party. Barry Goldwater who opposed the civil tights act as a republican was.
Barry Goldwater explains his vote against the Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Democratic party has been fistfucking blacks up the ass since the beginning. The Republican party was founded with a mission to give equal rights to blacks. The Republicans have NEVER floundered from that goal. To this day the Republican party still supports equal rights.Now is the time to end republican lies that claim blacks need to be republicans because the republican party is the party of racial equality and democrats are racists. Because most of the wites here are racist republicans and refuse to talk about anyhig past slavey so they can fill bandwidth full of excuses about who they didn't own, we will look at some of the political aspects of those 100 years.
1. Republicans and Democrats after the Civil War
It’s true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. It’s also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But there’s more to it.
The Civil War-era GOP wasn’t that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding, and monopolizing the new black vote.
In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.
2. Democrats v Republicans on Jim Crow
Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.
During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies — it wasn’t worth their while.
3. President Truman Integrates the Troops: 1948
Black people are still living in segregation under Jim Crow. Nonetheless, African Americans agree to serve in World War II.
At war’s end, President Harry Truman, a Democrat, used an Executive Order to integrate the troops. (That order was not executed until 1963, however because: racism.)
How Republicans and Democrats switched on civil rights
Now as you continue reading you will see the usual lines republicans here have used to build their disingenuous argument.
Definition of disingenuous
: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness
So while we see that may democrats at that time opposed civil rights, what these repubicans wll not say is this:
In fact, a greater percentage of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats. Support for the Act followed geographic, not party, lines.
Soon after, the Republicans came up with their Southern Strategy — a plan to woo white Southern voters to the party for the 1968 election.
The Kennedy and Johnson administrations had advanced civil rights, largely through national legislation and direct executive actions. So, the Southern Strategy was the opposite — states’ rights and no integration.
As in the Civil War, the concepts of “states’ rights” and “tradition,” were codes for “maintaining white supremacy.”
Starting with Thurmond in 1964, and continuing throughout the Johnson and Nixon administrations, Dixiecrats left the Democrats for the Republicans.
Those Racist Dixiecrats Create Mainstream Republican Policy
By the time they left the Democrats, Dixiecrats Thurmond and Representative (later Senator) Jesse Helms were on the fringes of their party.
But their ideas formed modern GOP’s core platform.
In a campaign ad, Democrat-turned-Republican Jesse Helms said “racial quotas” prevented white people from getting jobs. The lie of racial quotas persists in the GOP’s rejection of affirmative action. Racial quotas are illegal.
So if I am black and know all this, which is why I won't be a republican, what makes these racists think millions of other blacks do not know the same thing? So just exactly who is trying to trick who? What party is trying to get blacks to support policies diametrically opposed to our best interests? The democrats do not believe that blacks can only make it if liberals give us government help. They believe than when you need help, the government should be able to help you. And since I pay hard earned tax money, I do expect more in return than troops stationed overseas while our government pays to help the poor in nations they use the military to blow up whilr paying to create jobs in foreign lands.
The Democratic party has been fistfucking blacks up the ass since the beginning. The Republican party was founded with a mission to give equal rights to blacks. The Republicans have NEVER floundered from that goal. To this day the Republican party still supports equal rights.Now is the time to end republican lies that claim blacks need to be republicans because the republican party is the party of racial equality and democrats are racists. Because most of the wites here are racist republicans and refuse to talk about anyhig past slavey so they can fill bandwidth full of excuses about who they didn't own, we will look at some of the political aspects of those 100 years.
1. Republicans and Democrats after the Civil War
It’s true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. It’s also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But there’s more to it.
The Civil War-era GOP wasn’t that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding, and monopolizing the new black vote.
In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.
2. Democrats v Republicans on Jim Crow
Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.
During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies — it wasn’t worth their while.
3. President Truman Integrates the Troops: 1948
Black people are still living in segregation under Jim Crow. Nonetheless, African Americans agree to serve in World War II.
At war’s end, President Harry Truman, a Democrat, used an Executive Order to integrate the troops. (That order was not executed until 1963, however because: racism.)
How Republicans and Democrats switched on civil rights
Now as you continue reading you will see the usual lines republicans here have used to build their disingenuous argument.
Definition of disingenuous
: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness
So while we see that may democrats at that time opposed civil rights, what these repubicans wll not say is this:
In fact, a greater percentage of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats. Support for the Act followed geographic, not party, lines.
Soon after, the Republicans came up with their Southern Strategy — a plan to woo white Southern voters to the party for the 1968 election.
The Kennedy and Johnson administrations had advanced civil rights, largely through national legislation and direct executive actions. So, the Southern Strategy was the opposite — states’ rights and no integration.
As in the Civil War, the concepts of “states’ rights” and “tradition,” were codes for “maintaining white supremacy.”
Starting with Thurmond in 1964, and continuing throughout the Johnson and Nixon administrations, Dixiecrats left the Democrats for the Republicans.
Those Racist Dixiecrats Create Mainstream Republican Policy
By the time they left the Democrats, Dixiecrats Thurmond and Representative (later Senator) Jesse Helms were on the fringes of their party.
But their ideas formed modern GOP’s core platform.
In a campaign ad, Democrat-turned-Republican Jesse Helms said “racial quotas” prevented white people from getting jobs. The lie of racial quotas persists in the GOP’s rejection of affirmative action. Racial quotas are illegal.
So if I am black and know all this, which is why I won't be a republican, what makes these racists think millions of other blacks do not know the same thing? So just exactly who is trying to trick who? What party is trying to get blacks to support policies diametrically opposed to our best interests? The democrats do not believe that blacks can only make it if liberals give us government help. They believe than when you need help, the government should be able to help you. And since I pay hard earned tax money, I do expect more in return than troops stationed overseas while our government pays to help the poor in nations they use the military to blow up whilr paying to create jobs in foreign lands.
You mention the KKK. The fact of the matter is that the KKK was the terrorist arm of the Democratic party. One commonly held misconception is that the KKK was on a mission to terrorize blacks. Their mission was actually to terrorize Republicans. They lynched many white Republicans and all blacks were just presumed to be Republicans because it would make no sense whatsoever for a black to be a Democrat. It would be pure lunacy for a black to be a Democrat. That still holds true to this day.
You mention Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms. Yes they did run as Republicans to get on the ticket because they couldn't win the Democratic primaries. They are Democrats who got on the Republican ticket simply because there were no Republicans to challenge them. The are called RINOs. That means Republican In Name Only. They still caucused with the Democrats, so their Republican label meant absolutely nothing. They never supported Republican ideology.
Blacks have been tricked into thinking that one day in the early 60s this all changed. It simply isn't true, but as absurd as it may seem, many blacks believe it. The media tricked them.
You mention blacks in the military to support your case. The fact of the matter that the Democrats got us into the senseless Vietnam war. To fight this war the Democrats re-instituted slavery via the draft. Conscription is a much worse form of slavery than merely being forced to pick cotton. That's right folks, in the late 60s the Democrats enslaved blacks AGAIN!
During the Vietnam war the Democrats made rules that effectively made blacks much more likely than whites to be drafted. And once in the military they were discriminated against. Only 2% of those promoted to officer were black.
And blacks were disproportionately drafted and assigned to combat duty by the Democrats. Even though blacks made up only 11% of the population, 16% of the draftees were black. And blacks were twice as likely as whites to be assigned to combat duty and killed. And those blacks who were lucky enough to survive were much more likely to come back disabled, oftentimes hooked on heroin.
After the Democrat Johnson enslaved the blacks, Republican Richard Nixon ended the war and emancipated the black slaves.
There's a pattern here. Democrats enslaved blacks and the Republican party was formed to emancipate them. Then during WWI, Wilson(D) enslaved blacks. The in WWII FDR enslaved blacks. In the Korean war, Truman(D) enslaved blacks and again a Republican Dwight Eisenhower emancipated them. During the Vietnam war, Johnson(D) enslaved blacks and then Nixon(R) emancipated them.
Over and over and over again, Democrats enslaved blacks and then Republicans emancipated them.
And you can bet your ass that it's just a matter of time before we see another Youtube video of a black man murdered by the police in a Democrat controlled city. It might be a week, it might be a month, it might be 3 months. But you know it's going to happen again and again.
In all these big cities that are controlled by Democrats the police are oppressing black neighborhoods. They are just sucking the money out of black neighborhoods via overcriminalization. Many blacks are afraid to call 911 in an emergency because they have an arrest warrant for some petty crime. Sometimes as minor as a traffic ticket they couldn't pay.
Look at the history of what Democrats have done to blacks. It's malicious, brutal and unconscionable. Just thinking about what the Democrats did to blacks is very disturbing and has literally brought me to tears at times. How can they be so cruel?
It's just plain EVIL!
That's the only way to explain it. True evil exists and evil men form evil institutions such as the Democratic party.
I have 5 adult children and a 3 year old daughter. Kids ask a lot of question and I know someday she is going to ask me what a Democrat is. Sooner or later I'm going to have to tell her. It's a very difficult thing to do as a father. I know from experience that she's going to ask why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?
And eventually, "why is the Democratic party still allowed to exist?
