Considering All Of History, Nobody Has Ever Been As Good At Propaganda

[Jets]

by the way, what policies made up the bulk of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights act??

And how come when it comes to those SAME POLICIES -- the main people who are STILL OPPOSED to them are CONSERVATIVES....as they have ALWAYS BEEN...

You can see that geography was far more predictive of voting coalitions on the Civil Rights than party affiliation. What linked Dirksen and Mansfield was the fact that they weren't from the south. In fact, 90% of members of Congress from states (or territories) that were part of the Union voted in favor of the act, while less than 10% of members of Congress from the old Confederate states voted for it. This 80pt difference between regions is far greater than the 15pt difference between parties.

But what happens when we control for both party affiliation and region? As Sean Trende noted earlier this year, "sometimes relationships become apparent only after you control for other factors".



In this case, it becomes clear that Democrats in the north and the south were more likely to vote for the bill than Republicans in the north and south respectively. This difference in both houses is statistically significant with over 95% confidence. It just so happened southerners made up a larger percentage of the Democratic than Republican caucus, which created the initial impression than Republicans were more in favor of the act.

Were Republicans really the party of civil rights in the 1960s? | Harry J Enten

Harry J Enten: Once you control for region, it turns out that Democrats were actually more likely to support the 1964 Civil Rights Act

www.theguardian.com

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

You can see that geography was far more predictive of voting coalitions on the Civil Rights than party affiliation. What linked Dirksen and Mansfield was the fact that they weren't from the south. In fact, 90% of members of Congress from states (or territories) that were part of the Union voted in favor of the act, while less than 10% of members of Congress from the old Confederate states voted for it. This 80pt difference between regions is far greater than the 15pt difference between parties.

But what happens when we control for both party affiliation and region? As Sean Trende noted earlier this year, "sometimes relationships become apparent only after you control for other factors".



In this case, it becomes clear that Democrats in the north and the south were more likely to vote for the bill than Republicans in the north and south respectively. This difference in both houses is statistically significant with over 95% confidence. It just so happened southerners made up a larger percentage of the Democratic than Republican caucus, which created the initial impression than Republicans were more in favor of the act.

Were Republicans really the party of civil rights in the 1960s? | Harry J Enten

Harry J Enten: Once you control for region, it turns out that Democrats were actually more likely to support the 1964 Civil Rights Act

www.theguardian.com

Yes, I have provided the Senate and House break down of the Civil Rights/Voting Rights Act many times....and they run away from it because it blows up their argument that only Republicans were in support of those policies....What is more true is that MOSTLY CONSERVATIVES WERE AGAINST THOSE POLICIES...of both parties

 

[jc456]

He was responding to PC.

yep, great, so your rake comment factually wrong.

 

[Jets]

Yes, I have provided the Senate and House break down of the Civil Rights/Voting Rights Act many times....and they run away from it because it blows up their argument that only Republicans were in support of those policies....What is more true is that MOSTLY CONSERVATIVES WERE AGAINST THOSE POLICIES...of both parties
View attachment 612575

Wait, you mean those conservative democrats?

 

[Jets]

yep, great, so your rake comment factually wrong.

Not it isn’t.

Point out what I said that was false.

I will wait.

 

[P@triot]

Not it isn’t. Point out what I said that was false. I will wait.

Because I clearly stated what era I was talking about. And you were too confused (and/or illiterate) to follow along.

 

[P@triot]

Wait, you mean those conservative democrats?

That don't exist and never did?

 

[Jets]

Because I clearly stated what era I was talking about. And you were too confused (and/or illiterate) to follow along.

Nope.

You jumped into the topic and didn’t read the exchange with PC. If you had you would have noted the time period and responded accordingly.
Instead of taking a minute to figure it out, you fired off puerile insults and made a fallacious claim that’s unsupportable.

Next time try harder.

 

[Jets]

That don't exist and never did?

Dismissed.

Enjoy that rake in your face.

 

[P@triot]

You jumped into the topic and didn’t read the exchange with PC. If you had you would have noted the time period and responded accordingly.

Oh snowflake...everything is there for everyone to read. She mentioned Goebbels when I literally had just read the "misinformation" article I posted moments before. It all aligned.

There was nothing to "figure out". Once again you try to rewrite history to support your failed position.

 

[P@triot]

Dismissed. Enjoy that rake in your face.

You got owned, snowflake. Deal with it.

 

[Jets]

You got owned, snowflake. Deal with it.

Says the poster who does not acknowledge that there were conservative Democrats.

Your white flag is accepted.

 

[Jets]

Oh snowflake...everything is there for everyone to read. She mentioned Goebbels when I literally had just read the "misinformation" article I posted moments before. It all aligned.

There was nothing to "figure out". Once again you try to rewrite history to support your failed position.

Already accepted your white flag.

Have a nice day

 

[Jets]

#ILTT

 

[PoliticalChic]

Where did I say it was not democrats?

Good to see you beat a hasty retreat from what you tried to imply.


Gettin' quite a beating today, huh???


Excellent.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You can stop proving you're an idiot, it was yesterday.

They oughta lynch every gd democrat there is!

“We should forgive our enemies, but not before they are hanged”― Heinrich Heine​

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually history there which Jets is incapable of citing because he didn't know it. Some "history buff".

History "butt."

 

[Jets]

Good to see you beat a hasty retreat from what you tried to imply.


Gettin' quite a beating today, huh???


Excellent.

No retreat. I said they were democrats,southern, and conservative.

Try rereading the posts.

You just take umbrage at the word “conservative“ being a part of the conversation.

Too bad you failed to study American history.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Never said they were not. I just added that they were conservative and racists.

Any questions

Did not think so.

You are quite a low-life.

You tried to shield the Democrats......the were not conservatives.


They were and are what they always were, with racism still central to their plans.

And you are lying scum.

Did I mention that already??? It bears repeating: you are lying scum.

 

[Jets]

You are quite a low-life.

You tried to shield the Democrats......the were not conservatives.


They were and are what they always were, with racism still central to their plans.

And you are lying scum.

Did I mention that already??? It bears repeating: you are lying scum.

Call me any name you like.

You lost the argument and have nothing left but a temper tantrum.

They were southern conservative Democrats.

Period