The First Black Republican Presidential Nominee Will Be.....

[Jitss617]

Could have been this guy if democrats weren’t so racist

 

[Grumblenuts]

Do you know what the definition of the word "racism" is? Don't give me your definition; give me the dictionary definition and the definition as most of the rest of the world understands the word.

My definition is what dictionaries provide.

racism
[ rey-siz-uh m ]
SEE SYNONYMS FOR racism ON THESAURUS.COM
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.

The power dynamic is implicit. Again, what did IM2 do to make you cry like such a victim in public?

He assumed I lied and made up my story because I'm white.

I doubt it was that simplistic, but please explain how that threatens or harms you given the definition provided?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You know what's funny about all this? Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, as far as I know, no majority-white Western developed nation except the U.S. has ever had a black leader. Neither the U.K. (that so many are quick to cite as being one of the first countries to abolish slavery), Canada, Germany, France, Holland, the Scandinavian countries and who knows how many others have ever had a black president/chancellor/prime minister.

 

[rightwinger]

Fact is, Republicans don’t have much of a record for electing blacks to any higher office.
President, Governor, Senator, Congress.
Just EIGHT in the last 150 years

For some reason, they don’t find them to be the better man for any office

It could be that since the civil rights act there just aren't that many black republicans. No wait, that would make to much sense. Ya you are right it is cause we are racists.

Not my fault the Republican can’t convince blacks and minorities that they are their best option.

Actually it has more to do with the democrats handing out FREE SHIT.

Free shit?

Like that $1.5 trillion tax cut Trump gave to billionaires?

I got a tax cut. Everyone with a job did.

So it's understandable why you didn't get one.

The hell they did

Not if you were in a blue state. You had your SALT tax deduction capped and lost your personal exemption.

 

[rightwinger]

You know what's funny about all this? Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, as far as I know, no majority-white Western developed nation except the U.S. has ever had a black leader. Neither the U.K. (that so many are quick to cite as being one of the first countries to abolish slavery), Canada, Germany, France, Holland, the Scandinavian countries and who knows how many others have ever had a black president/chancellor/prime minister.

Makes you proud to be an American doesn’t it?

 

[Correll]

Except you leapt from that, to talking about supporting the use of government power to enforce Jim Crow.


YOU did that, not me. So, drop your pretense that you did not.


His stated reason was not opposition to Civil Rights but concern about how that particular bill addressed the issue.


Considering his life long support of Civil Rights AND smaller government, that position is highly credible.


Thus his position and his presidential run was not the beginning of the debunked conspiracy theory of "The Southern Strategy".

Umm...you were the one jumping to a conclusion
I merely corrected you on it

Bullshit. YOu are a dishonest coward.


Barry Goldwater was not pandering to southern racists as you claimed. His opposition to that specific bill was not based on opposition to Civil Rights but to how that bill attempted to achieve them.


HIs campaign did not reflect the GOP "flipping" on Civil Rights, nor pandering to southern racists, as you claimed.


That you claimed those things and now when called on your shit, are trying to weasel out of them, instead of defending them, or admitting you were wrong,


is you being a race baiting asshole.

Explain how those views allowed Goldwater to win S Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana over a southern Democrat

With the dems flipping on the civil rights issue, the bloc voting of the racists that was the basis of dem control of the South, was broken.

This put the South in play. I'm not sure how much of a shift in actual voting was required to shift the states from blue to read. If the racists just stayed home, because they no longer had a voice, that alone might have done it. Southerns insulted by the idea of Yankees running their internal affairs likely contributed. Old school racists, who might still have harbored hopes of maintaining Jim Crow without help from their northern Dem allies, might have sided with Goldwater, hoping to avoid direct Federal interference. But all of that is speculation.


Do you want to compare the actual percent changes in the votes from the previous election for discussion purposes, or are you going to go back to troll boy hit and run snark comments?

Show your math

I'm not sure why it is "my" math, as we are both speculating on what went on with Southern voters, but sure.


So, lets take a look.

1956, Ike republican vs stevenson dem, the dem won 56.5% to 40%.

1956 United States presidential election in Alabama - Wikipedia



1960, Kennedy won over Nixon, 56.4% to 42%.

1964 Goldwater the republican won over the Dem, 69.4% vs 56.4%

1968 WALLACE won the state with 65.9% vs, 19.7% for the dem, and 14% for Nixon.


1972 Nixon won it with 72.4% vs 25.5% for the dem.

1976 CARTER won it, with 55.5% vs 42.6%.


So, Jim Crow South, the dems allied with the racists of the South, had a solid hold on 60% vs about 40% of the vote for Republicans.


Goldwater vs Johnson, in 64, it seems at least 30% crossed party lines.


68 looks like an odd outlier, with Wallace taking a huge majority, vs what we can assume were hard core dem and republican partisans of less than 20% for the dem and less than 15% for Nixon. Interestingly, this is AFTER you libs claim the Southern Strategy was in operation...


in 72, Nixon won Alabama, 72% vs 25% for a very liberal North Eastern Dem.


in 1976, again well after the Southern Strategy was supposed to be in operation, Jimmy CARTER, a strong Civil Rights Dem, won the State with a strong, 55 percent of the vote against 42, percent for Ford.


Elections in Alabama - Wikipedia


This is interesting. It shows Carter in 76, LOSING the white vote, 48% to 52%.


The narrative that the Myth of the Southern Strategy tells, is that the Evul Racist Whites of the South, betrayed by the dems, and pandered to by Evul Whites like Goldwater and Nixon, stopped voting dem and started voting republicans.



What we see instead is that 40 percent of whites in Alabama, one of the deepest and most reactionary states, were always voting republican, and that even after all the changes, that number only climbed, at most ten or twenty percent, depending on the candidates.


Ronald REAGAN, only beat Jimmy freaking CARTER, by less than TWO percentage points, in 1980.



Decades of supposed "Southern Strategy", moved the republican vote from 42% in 1962 to 48.7% in 1980.



A shift of less than ten percent of the vote.

 

[Correll]

Simply put, YOU were not a black voter in 1964, nor were you even born. I was, and I heard them voice their disdain for Goldwaters draconian "states rights, government overreach" INSULT, first hand.

You, did not.

My parents and grandparents were involved in the civil rights movement, and on foot they went out and knocked on doors to convince registered black voters in our community to leave the Republican party.


Because they were OUTRAGED and INSULTED.

Black voters WERE insulted by it. PERIOD.

Your post is nothing but speculation and a thinly veiled defense of an ideology that the civil war should have buried FOREVER.

Consequently, his position further drove black voters out of the Republican party, as it should have.

And it also left a PERMANENT stain on his legacy. As it SHOULD HAVE.

Putting the rights of citizens on hold due to what an outdated politician calls "government overreach," WAS AN INSULT.

PERIOD.

Sadly, that was only the start for the Republican Party as they embraced the deplorables and sold out minorities, immigrants and Muslims.

You are such a piece of shit. You say stupid ass vague general shit like this, with no specifics, and when I call you on it, you pretend that I am putting words in your mouth.


You are a dishonest, cowardly race baiting piece of shit.

What I said was quite specific.

Today’s Republican Party is a rehash of the Know Nothings who exploited hatred of Irish immigrants and Catholics to rise to political power.

If that was true, you would not spend so much time lying. If that was true, you would admit that Barry Goldwater was not opposed to civil rights, but just HOW that particular bill went about getting there.



You lie, because you know that you have to lie, to get people to vote for the agenda you want, that you know is bad for them.

That’s the way it works

I AM NOT A RACIST
But I support the rights of states to enforce racism

Or more honestly,


I AM NOT A RACIST, AND I THINK THIS METHOD OF FIGHTING RACISM IS THE WRONG WAY TO DO IT.



AND RW IS AN ASSHOLE.

 

[Correll]

Which was a conflict with what blacks wanted. But it was not an insult to their intelligence. It would only have been an insult to their intelligence if he has been lying about why he was doing it. That was my point. It is pathetic that you cannot admit that.


Because the cure had the potential to be another additional problem for the country.


No, it is not. Stating that he believed that the way the bill went about it was wrong, is not the same as being against the goal.




Bullshit. It was a practical matter of self interest to blacks. And Goldwater disagreeing with them on how to get there, was NOT an insult to them. It was a political disagreement.


It was only an insult to their intelligence, if he was LYING about his reasons. Which is why you denying that you said that, is stupid.




It is understandable that blacks, suffering under Jim Crow, and facing real racism and discrimination, were not patient with any discussion of METHODS, of fighting racism and discrimination.


IMO, that blame for the lie, lies with the dem liberals, who told and still tell them.

Simply put, YOU were not a black voter in 1964, nor were you even born. I was, and I heard them voice their disdain for Goldwaters draconian "states rights, government overreach" INSULT, first hand.

You, did not.

My parents and grandparents were involved in the civil rights movement, and on foot they went out and knocked on doors to convince registered black voters in our community to leave the Republican party.


Because they were OUTRAGED and INSULTED.

Black voters WERE insulted by it. PERIOD.

Your post is nothing but speculation and a thinly veiled defense of an ideology that the civil war should have buried FOREVER.

Consequently, his position further drove black voters out of the Republican party, as it should have.

And it also left a PERMANENT stain on his legacy. As it SHOULD HAVE.

Putting the rights of citizens on hold due to what an outdated politician calls "government overreach," WAS AN INSULT.

PERIOD.

You claimed it was an "insult to their intelligence".


That statement only makes sense, if you were assuming his stated position was a lie.


I have no doubt that the blacks of the time disagreed with him on that issue. If they choose to take offense at his position, that was their choice. I have no doubt that that was not Barry Goldwater's intent.


"Stain"? Time will tell. IMO, the government has certainly gone into "overreach" and the results have not been good.


IN the future, historians, white and black, might look back at him and his defeat as a very bad turning point for the US.

You are free to think as you wish. But the black voters of that generation DID take his position as an INSULT to their intelligence and they took it as an assault upon their value as tax paying citizens.

And I seriously doubt that anyone who believes in equality of the most basic rights for all citizens will view his defeat in the future as a "bad turning point.

If they have even a shred of moral decency.

And that is what this is about. You lefties NEED to define any political disagreements as emotionally and personally as possible,


because you use that for demagoguery, to turn various groups of voters, against your enemies, to prevent them from listening to the other side, on other issues.


It is how you are dividing America.


Right now, issues such as Abortion could be a bridge between black conservatives and the Republican Party, which represents the majority of whites.


BUT, people like you, lie about valid political disagreements and turn them into poison.


Barry Goldwater, disagreeing on how to achieve equality, was not an insult to blacks. It was a valid political disagreement.

But you people need to lie about it, to keep your lock on black votes.

You are purposefully dividing this nation, for partisan gain.

As you were told before, and are being told for the final time, I SAW the outrage in registered black voters over Goldwaters position on passing the civil rights bill. It was a condescending INSULT and an ASSAULT on the rights of black citizens, and there is no rhetoric that you can spew to justify it as being "OK".
......

I am not doubting what you say you saw. I am pointing out that the choice of those blacks to take offense to a political disagreement, was their choice and not on Goldwater.



But does not change the fact that disagreeing on how to do something, is not the same as opposing the goal.


That you and many other blacks choose to take offense over anything less than complete support for your way of doing things,


because it was so important to you, and/or your personal stake in the matter was so great,


does not change that.

 

[Correll]

Simply put, YOU were not a black voter in 1964, nor were you even born. I was, and I heard them voice their disdain for Goldwaters draconian "states rights, government overreach" INSULT, first hand.

You, did not.

My parents and grandparents were involved in the civil rights movement, and on foot they went out and knocked on doors to convince registered black voters in our community to leave the Republican party.


Because they were OUTRAGED and INSULTED.

Black voters WERE insulted by it. PERIOD.

Your post is nothing but speculation and a thinly veiled defense of an ideology that the civil war should have buried FOREVER.

Consequently, his position further drove black voters out of the Republican party, as it should have.

And it also left a PERMANENT stain on his legacy. As it SHOULD HAVE.

Putting the rights of citizens on hold due to what an outdated politician calls "government overreach," WAS AN INSULT.

PERIOD.

You claimed it was an "insult to their intelligence".


That statement only makes sense, if you were assuming his stated position was a lie.


I have no doubt that the blacks of the time disagreed with him on that issue. If they choose to take offense at his position, that was their choice. I have no doubt that that was not Barry Goldwater's intent.


"Stain"? Time will tell. IMO, the government has certainly gone into "overreach" and the results have not been good.


IN the future, historians, white and black, might look back at him and his defeat as a very bad turning point for the US.

You are free to think as you wish. But the black voters of that generation DID take his position as an INSULT to their intelligence and they took it as an assault upon their value as tax paying citizens.

And I seriously doubt that anyone who believes in equality of the most basic rights for all citizens will view his defeat in the future as a "bad turning point.

If they have even a shred of moral decency.

And that is what this is about. You lefties NEED to define any political disagreements as emotionally and personally as possible,


because you use that for demagoguery, to turn various groups of voters, against your enemies, to prevent them from listening to the other side, on other issues.


It is how you are dividing America.


Right now, issues such as Abortion could be a bridge between black conservatives and the Republican Party, which represents the majority of whites.


BUT, people like you, lie about valid political disagreements and turn them into poison.


Barry Goldwater, disagreeing on how to achieve equality, was not an insult to blacks. It was a valid political disagreement.

But you people need to lie about it, to keep your lock on black votes.

You are purposefully dividing this nation, for partisan gain.

As you were told before, and are being told for the final time, I SAW the outrage in registered black voters over Goldwaters position on passing the civil rights bill. It was a condescending INSULT and an ASSAULT on the rights of black citizens, and there is no rhetoric that you can spew to justify it as being "OK".

You were not even a blip on the radar during that era, and for YOU to climb on a soapbox and make a feeble attempt to lecture someone that saw it first hand is an an asinine joke that I am not even going to dignify with an argument.

Who in the hell do you think you are to categorize someone that you know nothing about as a so called "lefty, trying to divide the country", simply because I lived in an era where I actually saw where an outdated politician used peoples rights as a bargaining chip to take a position on a moral issue that should have been a no brainer based on human decency?

You nor anyone that you know was ever forced to ride in the back of a bus, accept substandard public services, be denied service based on race, or had urine and feces thrown on them for peacefully protesting just for the right to vote.

I saw those things happen, before you were even spit out.

You could not even imagine what that actually looks like. And if you actually experienced it first hand you would probably committ suicide or turn into a mass shooter.

The way that you constantly bellyache and piss and moan about "discrimination against white people", but seem to think it was ok to put BASIC rights for all on hold because of "government overreach" is a glaring example of the REAL HYPOCRISY that actually divides this country.

Your double standards for justice, make you a hypocrite who talks out of both sides of your mouth.

Barry Goldwater disagreeing with implementing equal rights for all for the sake of what he thought was proper "government protocol" was wrong, which is exactly why he he lost the election and contributed to driving numerous black voters out of YOUR party.

And for you to even attempt to wage a weak argument in a laughable effort to defend his poor decision nearly 60 years ago, just for the purpose of justifying your blind political loyalty in the face of utter stupidity speaks volumes about you as a person.

Everytime that I make the mistake of wasting time engaging you in a conversation of any kind, you manage to sink to the same level of absurdity, outright bald faced lies, and personal politics over country.

But at least you are a great reminder of the fact that the times which I recall so well, from many decades ago, could return very quickly because of people like YOU.

Let me get this right, blacks are SO IGNORANT that while the vast majority of Republicans and MORE then democrats I might add, voted for the bill, they were upset one guy didn't? So upset they joined the party that actually voted against it more then the Republicans? REALLY?

AND, you're the bad guy for pointing it out.

 

[rightwinger]

Umm...you were the one jumping to a conclusion
I merely corrected you on it

Bullshit. YOu are a dishonest coward.


Barry Goldwater was not pandering to southern racists as you claimed. His opposition to that specific bill was not based on opposition to Civil Rights but to how that bill attempted to achieve them.


HIs campaign did not reflect the GOP "flipping" on Civil Rights, nor pandering to southern racists, as you claimed.


That you claimed those things and now when called on your shit, are trying to weasel out of them, instead of defending them, or admitting you were wrong,


is you being a race baiting asshole.

Explain how those views allowed Goldwater to win S Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana over a southern Democrat

With the dems flipping on the civil rights issue, the bloc voting of the racists that was the basis of dem control of the South, was broken.

This put the South in play. I'm not sure how much of a shift in actual voting was required to shift the states from blue to read. If the racists just stayed home, because they no longer had a voice, that alone might have done it. Southerns insulted by the idea of Yankees running their internal affairs likely contributed. Old school racists, who might still have harbored hopes of maintaining Jim Crow without help from their northern Dem allies, might have sided with Goldwater, hoping to avoid direct Federal interference. But all of that is speculation.


Do you want to compare the actual percent changes in the votes from the previous election for discussion purposes, or are you going to go back to troll boy hit and run snark comments?

Show your math

I'm not sure why it is "my" math, as we are both speculating on what went on with Southern voters, but sure.


So, lets take a look.

1956, Ike republican vs stevenson dem, the dem won 56.5% to 40%.

1956 United States presidential election in Alabama - Wikipedia



1960, Kennedy won over Nixon, 56.4% to 42%.

1964 Goldwater the republican won over the Dem, 69.4% vs 56.4%

1968 WALLACE won the state with 65.9% vs, 19.7% for the dem, and 14% for Nixon.


1972 Nixon won it with 72.4% vs 25.5% for the dem.

1976 CARTER won it, with 55.5% vs 42.6%.


So, Jim Crow South, the dems allied with the racists of the South, had a solid hold on 60% vs about 40% of the vote for Republicans.


Goldwater vs Johnson, in 64, it seems at least 30% crossed party lines.


68 looks like an odd outlier, with Wallace taking a huge majority, vs what we can assume were hard core dem and republican partisans of less than 20% for the dem and less than 15% for Nixon. Interestingly, this is AFTER you libs claim the Southern Strategy was in operation...


in 72, Nixon won Alabama, 72% vs 25% for a very liberal North Eastern Dem.


in 1976, again well after the Southern Strategy was supposed to be in operation, Jimmy CARTER, a strong Civil Rights Dem, won the State with a strong, 55 percent of the vote against 42, percent for Ford.


Elections in Alabama - Wikipedia


This is interesting. It shows Carter in 76, LOSING the white vote, 48% to 52%.


The narrative that the Myth of the Southern Strategy tells, is that the Evul Racist Whites of the South, betrayed by the dems, and pandered to by Evul Whites like Goldwater and Nixon, stopped voting dem and started voting republicans.



What we see instead is that 40 percent of whites in Alabama, one of the deepest and most reactionary states, were always voting republican, and that even after all the changes, that number only climbed, at most ten or twenty percent, depending on the candidates.


Ronald REAGAN, only beat Jimmy freaking CARTER, by less than TWO percentage points, in 1980.



Decades of supposed "Southern Strategy", moved the republican vote from 42% in 1962 to 48.7% in 1980.



A shift of less than ten percent of the vote.

So, let’s look where the Southern vote went after passing the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

1964. Republican Goldwater beat Southern Democrat LBJ
1968. The South supported rabid segregationist George Wallace
1972. South Supported Republican Nixon
1976. South Supported Democrat Carter
1980. South Supported Republican Reagan.

So, with the exception of 1976, when it supported fellow southerner Jimmy Carter.....The South went Red

More importantly to the Southern Strategy, was 1964 marked the point when the South started to vote for Republican Governor’s, Senators and Congressmen.

 

[Correll]

You claimed it was an "insult to their intelligence".


That statement only makes sense, if you were assuming his stated position was a lie.


I have no doubt that the blacks of the time disagreed with him on that issue. If they choose to take offense at his position, that was their choice. I have no doubt that that was not Barry Goldwater's intent.


"Stain"? Time will tell. IMO, the government has certainly gone into "overreach" and the results have not been good.


IN the future, historians, white and black, might look back at him and his defeat as a very bad turning point for the US.

You are free to think as you wish. But the black voters of that generation DID take his position as an INSULT to their intelligence and they took it as an assault upon their value as tax paying citizens.

And I seriously doubt that anyone who believes in equality of the most basic rights for all citizens will view his defeat in the future as a "bad turning point.

If they have even a shred of moral decency.

And that is what this is about. You lefties NEED to define any political disagreements as emotionally and personally as possible,


because you use that for demagoguery, to turn various groups of voters, against your enemies, to prevent them from listening to the other side, on other issues.


It is how you are dividing America.


Right now, issues such as Abortion could be a bridge between black conservatives and the Republican Party, which represents the majority of whites.


BUT, people like you, lie about valid political disagreements and turn them into poison.


Barry Goldwater, disagreeing on how to achieve equality, was not an insult to blacks. It was a valid political disagreement.

But you people need to lie about it, to keep your lock on black votes.

You are purposefully dividing this nation, for partisan gain.

As you were told before, and are being told for the final time, I SAW the outrage in registered black voters over Goldwaters position on passing the civil rights bill. It was a condescending INSULT and an ASSAULT on the rights of black citizens, and there is no rhetoric that you can spew to justify it as being "OK".

You were not even a blip on the radar during that era, and for YOU to climb on a soapbox and make a feeble attempt to lecture someone that saw it first hand is an an asinine joke that I am not even going to dignify with an argument.

Who in the hell do you think you are to categorize someone that you know nothing about as a so called "lefty, trying to divide the country", simply because I lived in an era where I actually saw where an outdated politician used peoples rights as a bargaining chip to take a position on a moral issue that should have been a no brainer based on human decency?

You nor anyone that you know was ever forced to ride in the back of a bus, accept substandard public services, be denied service based on race, or had urine and feces thrown on them for peacefully protesting just for the right to vote.

I saw those things happen, before you were even spit out.

You could not even imagine what that actually looks like. And if you actually experienced it first hand you would probably committ suicide or turn into a mass shooter.

The way that you constantly bellyache and piss and moan about "discrimination against white people", but seem to think it was ok to put BASIC rights for all on hold because of "government overreach" is a glaring example of the REAL HYPOCRISY that actually divides this country.

Your double standards for justice, make you a hypocrite who talks out of both sides of your mouth.

Barry Goldwater disagreeing with implementing equal rights for all for the sake of what he thought was proper "government protocol" was wrong, which is exactly why he he lost the election and contributed to driving numerous black voters out of YOUR party.

And for you to even attempt to wage a weak argument in a laughable effort to defend his poor decision nearly 60 years ago, just for the purpose of justifying your blind political loyalty in the face of utter stupidity speaks volumes about you as a person.

Everytime that I make the mistake of wasting time engaging you in a conversation of any kind, you manage to sink to the same level of absurdity, outright bald faced lies, and personal politics over country.

But at least you are a great reminder of the fact that the times which I recall so well, from many decades ago, could return very quickly because of people like YOU.

Let me get this right, blacks are SO IGNORANT that while the vast majority of Republicans and MORE then democrats I might add, voted for the bill, they were upset one guy didn't? So upset they joined the party that actually voted against it more then the Republicans? REALLY?

The reason you dic suckers remain on the wrong side of history is because you really do believe this dumb shit you just said.....

When is the last time you called a man a dick sucker to his face? Or is that just something you do, when you are safe, in your mommy's basement, online?

 

[Correll]

And that is what this is about. You lefties NEED to define any political disagreements as emotionally and personally as possible,


because you use that for demagoguery, to turn various groups of voters, against your enemies, to prevent them from listening to the other side, on other issues.


It is how you are dividing America.


Right now, issues such as Abortion could be a bridge between black conservatives and the Republican Party, which represents the majority of whites.


BUT, people like you, lie about valid political disagreements and turn them into poison.


Barry Goldwater, disagreeing on how to achieve equality, was not an insult to blacks. It was a valid political disagreement.

But you people need to lie about it, to keep your lock on black votes.

You are purposefully dividing this nation, for partisan gain.

As you were told before, and are being told for the final time, I SAW the outrage in registered black voters over Goldwaters position on passing the civil rights bill. It was a condescending INSULT and an ASSAULT on the rights of black citizens, and there is no rhetoric that you can spew to justify it as being "OK".

You were not even a blip on the radar during that era, and for YOU to climb on a soapbox and make a feeble attempt to lecture someone that saw it first hand is an an asinine joke that I am not even going to dignify with an argument.

Who in the hell do you think you are to categorize someone that you know nothing about as a so called "lefty, trying to divide the country", simply because I lived in an era where I actually saw where an outdated politician used peoples rights as a bargaining chip to take a position on a moral issue that should have been a no brainer based on human decency?

You nor anyone that you know was ever forced to ride in the back of a bus, accept substandard public services, be denied service based on race, or had urine and feces thrown on them for peacefully protesting just for the right to vote.

I saw those things happen, before you were even spit out.

You could not even imagine what that actually looks like. And if you actually experienced it first hand you would probably committ suicide or turn into a mass shooter.

The way that you constantly bellyache and piss and moan about "discrimination against white people", but seem to think it was ok to put BASIC rights for all on hold because of "government overreach" is a glaring example of the REAL HYPOCRISY that actually divides this country.

Your double standards for justice, make you a hypocrite who talks out of both sides of your mouth.

Barry Goldwater disagreeing with implementing equal rights for all for the sake of what he thought was proper "government protocol" was wrong, which is exactly why he he lost the election and contributed to driving numerous black voters out of YOUR party.

And for you to even attempt to wage a weak argument in a laughable effort to defend his poor decision nearly 60 years ago, just for the purpose of justifying your blind political loyalty in the face of utter stupidity speaks volumes about you as a person.

Everytime that I make the mistake of wasting time engaging you in a conversation of any kind, you manage to sink to the same level of absurdity, outright bald faced lies, and personal politics over country.

But at least you are a great reminder of the fact that the times which I recall so well, from many decades ago, could return very quickly because of people like YOU.

Let me get this right, blacks are SO IGNORANT that while the vast majority of Republicans and MORE then democrats I might add, voted for the bill, they were upset one guy didn't? So upset they joined the party that actually voted against it more then the Republicans? REALLY?

Seriously?

It is obvious that YOUR basic rights as a citizen have NEVER been subject to any kind of "vote", so you would be uninformed on how people who have, actually felt about even "temporary" opposition to their rights by a person who possibly could have led the country, for the sake of political posturing to appease a historically bigoted, backward geographical region.

Have you forgotten that this:ONE GUY" was running for PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES in that year?

That happens to be the person who is often referred to as the so called "leader of the free world". In that era, there WAS NOT true freedom for all, in America, in case you were unaware of that fact.

The person who signed the legislation into law got the votes of the people who the law affected.

The level of ignorance of some people here is BEYOND astonishing.

Ya I agree you and your buddy IM2 are beyond stupid and if blacks used this as an excuse to join the democrats they were ignorant as hell.

We really could care less about what you think. This ain't 1860 and you party damn near unanimously voted against a voting rights measure last year. Blacks were republicans because Lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation. After 100 years of apartheid, Johnson signed 2 measures that amounted to our second and third emancipation proclamations. Therefore we vote mostly democrat. Personally I am, not a member of either party. Because like Malcolm said:

Do you consider yourself an American?

 

[Grumblenuts]

You know what's funny about all this? Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, as far as I know, no majority-white Western developed nation except the U.S. has ever had a black leader. Neither the U.K. (that so many are quick to cite as being one of the first countries to abolish slavery), Canada, Germany, France, Holland, the Scandinavian countries and who knows how many others have ever had a black president/chancellor/prime minister.

Black Kings (and Queens) Ruled Europe For Almost 700 Years

 

[Correll]

Bullshit. YOu are a dishonest coward.


Barry Goldwater was not pandering to southern racists as you claimed. His opposition to that specific bill was not based on opposition to Civil Rights but to how that bill attempted to achieve them.


HIs campaign did not reflect the GOP "flipping" on Civil Rights, nor pandering to southern racists, as you claimed.


That you claimed those things and now when called on your shit, are trying to weasel out of them, instead of defending them, or admitting you were wrong,


is you being a race baiting asshole.

Explain how those views allowed Goldwater to win S Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana over a southern Democrat

With the dems flipping on the civil rights issue, the bloc voting of the racists that was the basis of dem control of the South, was broken.

This put the South in play. I'm not sure how much of a shift in actual voting was required to shift the states from blue to read. If the racists just stayed home, because they no longer had a voice, that alone might have done it. Southerns insulted by the idea of Yankees running their internal affairs likely contributed. Old school racists, who might still have harbored hopes of maintaining Jim Crow without help from their northern Dem allies, might have sided with Goldwater, hoping to avoid direct Federal interference. But all of that is speculation.


Do you want to compare the actual percent changes in the votes from the previous election for discussion purposes, or are you going to go back to troll boy hit and run snark comments?

Show your math

I'm not sure why it is "my" math, as we are both speculating on what went on with Southern voters, but sure.


So, lets take a look.

1956, Ike republican vs stevenson dem, the dem won 56.5% to 40%.

1956 United States presidential election in Alabama - Wikipedia



1960, Kennedy won over Nixon, 56.4% to 42%.

1964 Goldwater the republican won over the Dem, 69.4% vs 56.4%

1968 WALLACE won the state with 65.9% vs, 19.7% for the dem, and 14% for Nixon.


1972 Nixon won it with 72.4% vs 25.5% for the dem.

1976 CARTER won it, with 55.5% vs 42.6%.


So, Jim Crow South, the dems allied with the racists of the South, had a solid hold on 60% vs about 40% of the vote for Republicans.


Goldwater vs Johnson, in 64, it seems at least 30% crossed party lines.


68 looks like an odd outlier, with Wallace taking a huge majority, vs what we can assume were hard core dem and republican partisans of less than 20% for the dem and less than 15% for Nixon. Interestingly, this is AFTER you libs claim the Southern Strategy was in operation...


in 72, Nixon won Alabama, 72% vs 25% for a very liberal North Eastern Dem.


in 1976, again well after the Southern Strategy was supposed to be in operation, Jimmy CARTER, a strong Civil Rights Dem, won the State with a strong, 55 percent of the vote against 42, percent for Ford.


Elections in Alabama - Wikipedia


This is interesting. It shows Carter in 76, LOSING the white vote, 48% to 52%.


The narrative that the Myth of the Southern Strategy tells, is that the Evul Racist Whites of the South, betrayed by the dems, and pandered to by Evul Whites like Goldwater and Nixon, stopped voting dem and started voting republicans.



What we see instead is that 40 percent of whites in Alabama, one of the deepest and most reactionary states, were always voting republican, and that even after all the changes, that number only climbed, at most ten or twenty percent, depending on the candidates.


Ronald REAGAN, only beat Jimmy freaking CARTER, by less than TWO percentage points, in 1980.



Decades of supposed "Southern Strategy", moved the republican vote from 42% in 1962 to 48.7% in 1980.



A shift of less than ten percent of the vote.

So, let’s look where the Southern vote went after passing the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

1964. Republican Goldwater beat Southern Democrat LBJ
1968. The South supported rabid segregationist George Wallace
1972. South Supported Republican Nixon
1976. South Supported Democrat Carter
1980. South Supported Republican Reagan.

So, with the exception of 1976, when it supported fellow southerner Jimmy Carter.....The South went Red

More importantly to the Southern Strategy, was 1964 marked the point when the South started to vote for Republican Governor’s, Senators and Congressmen.

1. 1968, the "south" did not support George Wallace. He did not even win half of the Southern States. Why you lie?

2. You challenged me to "show my math" on how big or little the shift was. I have done so, it was less than ten percent. Your narrative of a massive backlash being the only story in the South, is just false.


3. ESPECIALLY in light of what we know happened to George Wallace and his career.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Do you know what the definition of the word "racism" is? Don't give me your definition; give me the dictionary definition and the definition as most of the rest of the world understands the word.

My definition is what dictionaries provide.

racism
[ rey-siz-uh m ]
SEE SYNONYMS FOR racism ON THESAURUS.COM
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.

The power dynamic is implicit.

No, it is not. And why didn't you post the complete definition? Here, let me do that for you:

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Merriam-Webster's defines racism as:

1: A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
2: Racial prejudice or discrimination.

Again, what did IM2 do to make you cry like such a victim in public?

He called me a liar in public. Where the fuck else was I going to talk about it?

He assumed I lied and made up my story because I'm white.

I doubt it was that simplistic,

Were you there? Did you even fully read my earlier post about it? As I already said, that discussion was where he and I had our first exchanges. He didn't know me from Adam but had the temerity to accuse me of lying about my experience.

It doesn't get any more simplistic than that. Here, see for yourself: Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

My reason for bringing that up in the first place was to illustrate how quickly people today are inclined to see racism around every corner.

but please explain how that threatens or harms you given the definition provided?

It doesn't and I never said it did. But what it does do is show how IM2 judges people by race.

Now let me ask you a question. IM2 considers me racist and has called me one numerous times. Given that I have never oppressed him and have no power or authority to do so; and given that I do not even meet the criteria laid out in the definitions (I hold no beliefs in inherent differences between the races and I do not feel my race is superior or that any race is inferior), on what basis does he justifiably consider me racist?

 

[Correll]

Do you know what the definition of the word "racism" is? Don't give me your definition; give me the dictionary definition and the definition as most of the rest of the world understands the word.

My definition is what dictionaries provide.

racism
[ rey-siz-uh m ]
SEE SYNONYMS FOR racism ON THESAURUS.COM
noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.

The power dynamic is implicit.

No, it is not. And why didn't you post the complete definition? Here, let me do that for you:

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Merriam-Webster's defines racism as:

1: A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
2: Racial prejudice or discrimination.

Again, what did IM2 do to make you cry like such a victim in public?

He called me a liar in public. Where the fuck else was I going to talk about it?

He assumed I lied and made up my story because I'm white.

I doubt it was that simplistic,

Were you there? Did you even fully read my earlier post about it? As I already said, that discussion was where he and I had our first exchanges. He didn't know me from Adam but had the temerity to accuse me of lying about my experience.

It doesn't get any more simplistic than that. Here, see for yourself: Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

My reason for bringing that up in the first place was to illustrate how quickly people today are inclined to see racism around every corner.

but please explain how that threatens or harms you given the definition provided?

It doesn't and I never said it did. But what it does do is show how IM2 judges people by race.

Now let me ask you a question. IM2 considers me racist and has called me one numerous times. Given that I have never oppressed him and have no power or authority to do so; and given that I do not even meet the criteria laid out in the definitions (I hold no beliefs in inherent differences between the races and I do not feel my race is superior or that any race is inferior), on what basis does he justifiably consider me racist?

Lefties call people racist, because lefties are lying assholes.



That is their "justification".

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You know what's funny about all this? Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, as far as I know, no majority-white Western developed nation except the U.S. has ever had a black leader. Neither the U.K. (that so many are quick to cite as being one of the first countries to abolish slavery), Canada, Germany, France, Holland, the Scandinavian countries and who knows how many others have ever had a black president/chancellor/prime minister.

Makes you proud to be an American doesn’t it?

It does, actually. I'm glad we've made the strides in racial harmony that we have. I just find it ironic that people like you paint America as some backwards shithole where blacks can't get ahead and yet no one else has ever elected a black leader.

I don't know what it is you think I'm doing here but I'm not racist and have said nothing critical of blacks. I have black friends, coworkers and family. I have a black grandniece and grandnephew that I love dearly and a nephew that recently adopted a black boy.

I simply have a problem with hypocrisy, double standards and I call bullshit when I see it. I think Obama was nominated and elected because he's black and I think he was given the Nobel prize because he's black. This is not a criticism of him as a person, a black man or even as president. It's just my opinion as to how it all came about.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You know what's funny about all this? Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, as far as I know, no majority-white Western developed nation except the U.S. has ever had a black leader. Neither the U.K. (that so many are quick to cite as being one of the first countries to abolish slavery), Canada, Germany, France, Holland, the Scandinavian countries and who knows how many others have ever had a black president/chancellor/prime minister.

Black Kings (and Queens) Ruled Europe For Almost 700 Years

And every one of them got there by conquering.

 

[rightwinger]

Explain how those views allowed Goldwater to win S Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana over a southern Democrat

With the dems flipping on the civil rights issue, the bloc voting of the racists that was the basis of dem control of the South, was broken.

This put the South in play. I'm not sure how much of a shift in actual voting was required to shift the states from blue to read. If the racists just stayed home, because they no longer had a voice, that alone might have done it. Southerns insulted by the idea of Yankees running their internal affairs likely contributed. Old school racists, who might still have harbored hopes of maintaining Jim Crow without help from their northern Dem allies, might have sided with Goldwater, hoping to avoid direct Federal interference. But all of that is speculation.


Do you want to compare the actual percent changes in the votes from the previous election for discussion purposes, or are you going to go back to troll boy hit and run snark comments?

Show your math

I'm not sure why it is "my" math, as we are both speculating on what went on with Southern voters, but sure.


So, lets take a look.

1956, Ike republican vs stevenson dem, the dem won 56.5% to 40%.

1956 United States presidential election in Alabama - Wikipedia



1960, Kennedy won over Nixon, 56.4% to 42%.

1964 Goldwater the republican won over the Dem, 69.4% vs 56.4%

1968 WALLACE won the state with 65.9% vs, 19.7% for the dem, and 14% for Nixon.


1972 Nixon won it with 72.4% vs 25.5% for the dem.

1976 CARTER won it, with 55.5% vs 42.6%.


So, Jim Crow South, the dems allied with the racists of the South, had a solid hold on 60% vs about 40% of the vote for Republicans.


Goldwater vs Johnson, in 64, it seems at least 30% crossed party lines.


68 looks like an odd outlier, with Wallace taking a huge majority, vs what we can assume were hard core dem and republican partisans of less than 20% for the dem and less than 15% for Nixon. Interestingly, this is AFTER you libs claim the Southern Strategy was in operation...


in 72, Nixon won Alabama, 72% vs 25% for a very liberal North Eastern Dem.


in 1976, again well after the Southern Strategy was supposed to be in operation, Jimmy CARTER, a strong Civil Rights Dem, won the State with a strong, 55 percent of the vote against 42, percent for Ford.


Elections in Alabama - Wikipedia


This is interesting. It shows Carter in 76, LOSING the white vote, 48% to 52%.


The narrative that the Myth of the Southern Strategy tells, is that the Evul Racist Whites of the South, betrayed by the dems, and pandered to by Evul Whites like Goldwater and Nixon, stopped voting dem and started voting republicans.



What we see instead is that 40 percent of whites in Alabama, one of the deepest and most reactionary states, were always voting republican, and that even after all the changes, that number only climbed, at most ten or twenty percent, depending on the candidates.


Ronald REAGAN, only beat Jimmy freaking CARTER, by less than TWO percentage points, in 1980.



Decades of supposed "Southern Strategy", moved the republican vote from 42% in 1962 to 48.7% in 1980.



A shift of less than ten percent of the vote.

So, let’s look where the Southern vote went after passing the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

1964. Republican Goldwater beat Southern Democrat LBJ
1968. The South supported rabid segregationist George Wallace
1972. South Supported Republican Nixon
1976. South Supported Democrat Carter
1980. South Supported Republican Reagan.

So, with the exception of 1976, when it supported fellow southerner Jimmy Carter.....The South went Red

More importantly to the Southern Strategy, was 1964 marked the point when the South started to vote for Republican Governor’s, Senators and Congressmen.

1. 1968, the "south" did not support George Wallace. He did not even win half of the Southern States. Why you lie?

2. You challenged me to "show my math" on how big or little the shift was. I have done so, it was less than ten percent. Your narrative of a massive backlash being the only story in the South, is just false.


3. ESPECIALLY in light of what we know happened to George Wallace and his career.

WHAT States do you think George Wallace won?
New England?

 

[IM2]

As you were told before, and are being told for the final time, I SAW the outrage in registered black voters over Goldwaters position on passing the civil rights bill. It was a condescending INSULT and an ASSAULT on the rights of black citizens, and there is no rhetoric that you can spew to justify it as being "OK".

You were not even a blip on the radar during that era, and for YOU to climb on a soapbox and make a feeble attempt to lecture someone that saw it first hand is an an asinine joke that I am not even going to dignify with an argument.

Who in the hell do you think you are to categorize someone that you know nothing about as a so called "lefty, trying to divide the country", simply because I lived in an era where I actually saw where an outdated politician used peoples rights as a bargaining chip to take a position on a moral issue that should have been a no brainer based on human decency?

You nor anyone that you know was ever forced to ride in the back of a bus, accept substandard public services, be denied service based on race, or had urine and feces thrown on them for peacefully protesting just for the right to vote.

I saw those things happen, before you were even spit out.

You could not even imagine what that actually looks like. And if you actually experienced it first hand you would probably committ suicide or turn into a mass shooter.

The way that you constantly bellyache and piss and moan about "discrimination against white people", but seem to think it was ok to put BASIC rights for all on hold because of "government overreach" is a glaring example of the REAL HYPOCRISY that actually divides this country.

Your double standards for justice, make you a hypocrite who talks out of both sides of your mouth.

Barry Goldwater disagreeing with implementing equal rights for all for the sake of what he thought was proper "government protocol" was wrong, which is exactly why he he lost the election and contributed to driving numerous black voters out of YOUR party.

And for you to even attempt to wage a weak argument in a laughable effort to defend his poor decision nearly 60 years ago, just for the purpose of justifying your blind political loyalty in the face of utter stupidity speaks volumes about you as a person.

Everytime that I make the mistake of wasting time engaging you in a conversation of any kind, you manage to sink to the same level of absurdity, outright bald faced lies, and personal politics over country.

But at least you are a great reminder of the fact that the times which I recall so well, from many decades ago, could return very quickly because of people like YOU.

Let me get this right, blacks are SO IGNORANT that while the vast majority of Republicans and MORE then democrats I might add, voted for the bill, they were upset one guy didn't? So upset they joined the party that actually voted against it more then the Republicans? REALLY?

Seriously?

It is obvious that YOUR basic rights as a citizen have NEVER been subject to any kind of "vote", so you would be uninformed on how people who have, actually felt about even "temporary" opposition to their rights by a person who possibly could have led the country, for the sake of political posturing to appease a historically bigoted, backward geographical region.

Have you forgotten that this:ONE GUY" was running for PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES in that year?

That happens to be the person who is often referred to as the so called "leader of the free world". In that era, there WAS NOT true freedom for all, in America, in case you were unaware of that fact.

The person who signed the legislation into law got the votes of the people who the law affected.

The level of ignorance of some people here is BEYOND astonishing.

Ya I agree you and your buddy IM2 are beyond stupid and if blacks used this as an excuse to join the democrats they were ignorant as hell.

If you are the kind of moron that would vote for someone to hold the highest office in the land who is slow to react, or doesn't react to your self interests, just based on blind and stupid party loyalty, how do you even manage life's basics.....like walking and talking at the same time?

You were not a black voter in the 1960's, so you don't know what the hell you're talking about, and truthfully, it's none of your fucking business nor did it affect you anyway.

Ahh ya you realize your ignorant reason for allowing the democratic party to subjugate blacks for the last 60 years was bad and so you get defensive. Be specific and cite what the democratic party did for blacks in the last 60 years. Then look at what Trump did for blacks in the last 3 years.

We don't have to explain to your white racist ass why blacks are mostly democrats. And I'm not saying this because I can't show your ass anything either xxxx xxx. trump has done nothing for us but repeat the unemployment rate. A rate that was dropping before he took office. I showed you one reason why we don't vote republican when I showed you that all but 1 republican voted against a voting rights bill last fall. That's enough for you to understand why.