The republican party isn't racist

[2aguy]

Your premise fails terribly. Show me the neighborhoods where Blacks of any party affiliation and Republicans are frolicking together in racial harmony and bliss. Surely, the Republicans are eager to show how tolerant they are and set the example that they find the democrats to be so lacking !

Th reason blacks don't affiliate with repubs as much as they do with democrats is really a reflection of the self segregating culture of most blacks. You have the shoe on the wrong foot. It's not that repubs disassociate with blacks. It's that blacks largely refuse to affiliate with repubs due to blacks' mostly lockstep self-segregating culture. Do you really think that Major League Baseball is racist because blacks don't attend games or play much baseball? It's not MLB. It's self-segregating black culture that is responsible for that. And democrats love that and pander to it.

no. it's a function of the fact that the GOP has run the "southern strategy" since the passage of the civil rights law and endorses policies that are anti-minority.

only the guns god and gays brigade votes against their own self-interest.

The Southern Strategy is a myth.

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

And more... so you don't have to go to the link...but I would suggest that you do...

And their strongest piece of evidence for that belief was that Republican support in the South was not among poor whites or the old elites — the two groups that tended to hold the most retrograde beliefs on race — but among the emerging southern middle class, a fact recently documented by professors Byron Shafer and Richard Johnston in The End of Southern Exceptionalism: Class, Race, and Partisan Change in the Postwar South (Harvard University Press, 2006). Which is to say: The Republican rise in the South was contemporaneous with the decline of race as the most important political question and tracked the rise of middle-class voters moved mainly by economic considerations and anti-Communism.

The South had been in effect a Third World country within the United States, and that changed with the post-war economic boom. As Clay Risen put it in the New York Times: “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 GOP. 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.” The mythmakers would have you believe that it was the opposite: that your white-hooded hillbilly trailer-dwelling tornado-bait voters jumped ship because LBJ signed a civil-rights bill (passed on the strength of disproportionately Republican support in Congress). The facts suggest otherwise.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

 

[JQPublic1]

Th reason blacks don't affiliate with repubs as much as they do with democrats is really a reflection of the self segregating culture of most blacks. You have the shoe on the wrong foot. It's not that repubs disassociate with blacks. It's that blacks largely refuse to affiliate with repubs due to blacks' mostly lockstep self-segregating culture. Do you really think that Major League Baseball is racist because blacks don't attend games or play much baseball? It's not MLB. It's self-segregating black culture that is responsible for that. And democrats love that and pander to it.

no. it's a function of the fact that the GOP has run the "southern strategy" since the passage of the civil rights law and endorses policies that are anti-minority.

only the guns god and gays brigade votes against their own self-interest.

The Southern Strategy is a myth.

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

 

[2aguy]

And what exactly would have been the reason for racists to join the Republican party...with this as their platform...

The Republican platform in 1964 was hardly catnip for Klansmen: It spoke of the Johnson administration’s failure to help further the “just aspirations of the minority groups” and blasted the president for his refusal “to apply Republican-initiated retraining programs where most needed, particularly where they could afford new economic opportunities to Negro citizens.” Other planks in the platform included: “improvements of civil rights statutes adequate to changing needs of our times; such additional administrative or legislative actions as may be required to end the denial, for whatever unlawful reason, of the right to vote; continued opposition to discrimination based on race, creed, national origin or sex.” And Goldwater’s fellow Republicans ran on a 1964 platform demanding “full implementation and faithful execution of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and all other civil rights statutes, to assure equal rights and opportunities guaranteed by the Constitution to every citizen.” Some dog whistle.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

 

[2aguy]

no. it's a function of the fact that the GOP has run the "southern strategy" since the passage of the civil rights law and endorses policies that are anti-minority.

only the guns god and gays brigade votes against their own self-interest.

The Southern Strategy is a myth.

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

 

[JQPublic1]

Th reason blacks don't affiliate with repubs as much as they do with democrats is really a reflection of the self segregating culture of most blacks. You have the shoe on the wrong foot. It's not that repubs disassociate with blacks. It's that blacks largely refuse to affiliate with repubs due to blacks' mostly lockstep self-segregating culture. Do you really think that Major League Baseball is racist because blacks don't attend games or play much baseball? It's not MLB. It's self-segregating black culture that is responsible for that. And democrats love that and pander to it.

no. it's a function of the fact that the GOP has run the "southern strategy" since the passage of the civil rights law and endorses policies that are anti-minority.

only the guns god and gays brigade votes against their own self-interest.

The Southern Strategy is a myth.

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

And more... so you don't have to go to the link...but I would suggest that you do...

And their strongest piece of evidence for that belief was that Republican support in the South was not among poor whites or the old elites — the two groups that tended to hold the most retrograde beliefs on race — but among the emerging southern middle class, a fact recently documented by professors Byron Shafer and Richard Johnston in The End of Southern Exceptionalism: Class, Race, and Partisan Change in the Postwar South (Harvard University Press, 2006). Which is to say: The Republican rise in the South was contemporaneous with the decline of race as the most important political question and tracked the rise of middle-class voters moved mainly by economic considerations and anti-Communism.

The South had been in effect a Third World country within the United States, and that changed with the post-war economic boom. As Clay Risen put it in the New York Times: “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 GOP. 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.” The mythmakers would have you believe that it was the opposite: that your white-hooded hillbilly trailer-dwelling tornado-bait voters jumped ship because LBJ signed a civil-rights bill (passed on the strength of disproportionately Republican support in Congress). The facts suggest otherwise.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What a crock. The National Review is FOS for publishing that crap.
The south still is home to the poorest states in the Union. And if the majority ( working class whites and Blacks} stayed democrats after your fictious BOON era how did the South suddenly turn republican red?

 

[2aguy]

no. it's a function of the fact that the GOP has run the "southern strategy" since the passage of the civil rights law and endorses policies that are anti-minority.

only the guns god and gays brigade votes against their own self-interest.

The Southern Strategy is a myth.

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

And more... so you don't have to go to the link...but I would suggest that you do...

And their strongest piece of evidence for that belief was that Republican support in the South was not among poor whites or the old elites — the two groups that tended to hold the most retrograde beliefs on race — but among the emerging southern middle class, a fact recently documented by professors Byron Shafer and Richard Johnston in The End of Southern Exceptionalism: Class, Race, and Partisan Change in the Postwar South (Harvard University Press, 2006). Which is to say: The Republican rise in the South was contemporaneous with the decline of race as the most important political question and tracked the rise of middle-class voters moved mainly by economic considerations and anti-Communism.

The South had been in effect a Third World country within the United States, and that changed with the post-war economic boom. As Clay Risen put it in the New York Times: “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 GOP. 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.” The mythmakers would have you believe that it was the opposite: that your white-hooded hillbilly trailer-dwelling tornado-bait voters jumped ship because LBJ signed a civil-rights bill (passed on the strength of disproportionately Republican support in Congress). The facts suggest otherwise.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What a crock. The National Review is FOS for publishing that crap.
The south still is home to the poorest states in the Union. And if the majority ( working class whites and Blacks} stayed democrats after your fictious BOON era how did the South suddenly turn republican red?

I knew you wouldn't read the truth or reality, but I posted it anyway...just in case you had a moment of clarity.....

 

[JQPublic1]

The Southern Strategy is a myth.

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed [segregation]( author's error). After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

 

[2aguy]

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

Yeah...that green color is hard to read....try a different one...and my posts show that your post is stupid.....thanks for trying though.....

 

[JQPublic1]

Not one democrat alive today took part in slavery.

Jim Crow? Maybe a few old codgers in Alabama. Mississippi or Georgia!

Really? We made you stop owning people, but you still force people to do things they don't want to do. Nothing has changed, only your methods of enslavement.

YOU did no such thing. You'd have to be around 150 years old to be a part of the "we" who stopped slavery. But aren't you a conservative? If so, you have the roles reversed. It was liberals who emancipated the slaves from generations of conservative oppression.

How about you name a few, along with the party they belong to...

I am not sure you have the IQ to understand the complexities involved in the shifting political party paradigm that took place in the middle decades of the 20th Century.

That being said, party affiliation is merely circumstantial...a convenient construct behind which conservatives and liberals of each party can move freely and vote freely. Obviously there is no mandated strict loyalty to one party or the other. Otherwise, one party would hold the reins of government in perpetuity.

Conservatism and Liberalism are the key terms here, not Republican or Democrat. Here is the answer you want >
Part (1) The True Democrats! | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

The only people switching parties were blacks who decided that going with Santa Claus (the democrats) would be profitable. We know that was a horrible mistake that destroyed the once conservative black family.

Wrong!

 

[2aguy]

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

Yeah...that green color is hard to read....try a different one...and my posts show that your post is stupid.....thanks for trying though.....

You do realize that bill clinton, the serial rapist, had orval faubus on the stage when he became governor of Arkansas..right? And that he dedicated a statue to j. william fulbright, a good freind and arch segregationist...and also gave him a presidential medal of freedom...right?

 

[JQPublic1]

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

Yeah...that green color is hard to read....try a different one...and my posts show that your post is stupid.....thanks for trying though.....

Yeah..righhhhttt! What color do you want it in..I still have time to change it!

 

[2aguy]

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

Blacks vote democrat because they have been bought off by welfare...johnson told the democrats that they could get their votes by buying them with welfare...something Republicans don't do....they don't want slaves...the democrats do....

 

[2aguy]

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

Yeah...that green color is hard to read....try a different one...and my posts show that your post is stupid.....thanks for trying though.....

Yeah..righhhhttt! What color do you want it in..I still have time to change it!

Blue is easy to read...I tried red, but that is hard to read too.....

 

[2aguy]

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

Yeah...that green color is hard to read....try a different one...and my posts show that your post is stupid.....thanks for trying though.....

Yeah..righhhhttt! What color do you want it in..I still have time to change it!

I like to use colors to highlight quotes because it won't hide most of the qoute, the way the "quote" marks do.....something to keep in mind with a long passage.

If you want people to read the highlights of your link, I like to use the color quotes.....most people won't bother to go to the link or read it all anyway.

 

[JQPublic1]

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century. There is no radical break in the Republicans’ civil-rights history: From abolition to Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1875 to the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1960, and 1964, there exists a line that is by no means perfectly straight or unwavering but that nonetheless connects the politics of Lincoln with those of Dwight D. Eisenhower. And from slavery and secession to remorseless opposition to everything from Reconstruction to the anti-lynching laws, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, and the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, there exists a similarly identifiable line connecting John Calhoun and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Supporting civil-rights reform was not a radical turnaround for congressional Republicans in 1964, but it was a radical turnaround for Johnson and the Democrats.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What does that link have to do with my question?

They explain why you are wrong. The parties did not change in the 1960s, the democrats changed tactics, instead of lynching blacks to keep them from voting, Johnson realized there was nothing the demcorats could do to keep blacks from voting, so to keep power, the democrats would have to buy their votes.....and whitewash the racist history of the democrat party.

Then the new democrats came along, and they were determined to not only control blacks, but to control all Americans....

More BS.

In 1948 Democrats alienated white Southerners in two ways. The Democratic National Convention adopted a strong civil rights plank, leading to a walkout by Southerners. Two weeks later President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981 integrating the armed forces. From 1948 onward, southern whites looked for political accommodation for their views.

By 1964, the Democratic lock on the South was decisively broken. The long-term cause was that the region was becoming more like the rest of the nation and could not long stand apart in terms of racial segregation. Modernization that brought factories, businesses, and cities, and millions of migrants from the North; far more people graduated from high school and college. Meanwhile the cotton and tobacco basis of the traditional South faded away, as former farmers moved to town or commuted to factory jobs. The immediate cause of the political transition involved civil rights. The civil rights movement caused enormous controversy in the white South with many attacking it as a violation of states' rights. When segregation was outlawed by court order and by the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, a die-hard element resisted integration, led by Democratic governors Orval Faubus of Arkansas, Lester Maddox of Georgia, and, especially George Wallace of Alabama. These populist governors appealed to a less-educated, blue-collar electorate that on economic grounds favored the Democratic party, but opposed segregation. After passage of the Civil Rights Act most Southerners accepted the integration of most institutions (except public schools). With the old barrier to becoming a Republican removed, traditional Southerners joined the new middle class and the Northern transplants in moving toward the Republican party. Integration thus liberated Southern politics, just asMartin Luther King had promised. Critics allege that the old racism has not totally disappeared but instead is hidden in the Republican vote, and can be seen in Nixon’s Southern Strategy[specify]. Meanwhile the newly enfranchised black voters supported Democratic candidates at the 85-90% level.

South Becomes Republican

Yeah...that green color is hard to read....try a different one...and my posts show that your post is stupid.....thanks for trying though.....

I wont let a color keep you from getting educated and that is the ONLy reason I changed it. As far as your NR article, the magazine could do better if they had went to the local high school and offered it up as a project for sophomores. They would have done better research!

 

[JQPublic1]

And what exactly would have been the reason for racists to join the Republican party...with this as their platform...

The Republican platform in 1964 was hardly catnip for Klansmen: It spoke of the Johnson administration’s failure to help further the “just aspirations of the minority groups” and blasted the president for his refusal “to apply Republican-initiated retraining programs where most needed, particularly where they could afford new economic opportunities to Negro citizens.” Other planks in the platform included: “improvements of civil rights statutes adequate to changing needs of our times; such additional administrative or legislative actions as may be required to end the denial, for whatever unlawful reason, of the right to vote; continued opposition to discrimination based on race, creed, national origin or sex.” And Goldwater’s fellow Republicans ran on a 1964 platform demanding “full implementation and faithful execution of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and all other civil rights statutes, to assure equal rights and opportunities guaranteed by the Constitution to every citizen.” Some dog whistle.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

I am still waiting for a clear direct answer. Your deflection is well noted!

Why did the the South turn solidly republican red after the mid 1960s?

 

[JQPublic1]

The Southern Strategy is a myth.

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

And more... so you don't have to go to the link...but I would suggest that you do...

And their strongest piece of evidence for that belief was that Republican support in the South was not among poor whites or the old elites — the two groups that tended to hold the most retrograde beliefs on race — but among the emerging southern middle class, a fact recently documented by professors Byron Shafer and Richard Johnston in The End of Southern Exceptionalism: Class, Race, and Partisan Change in the Postwar South (Harvard University Press, 2006). Which is to say: The Republican rise in the South was contemporaneous with the decline of race as the most important political question and tracked the rise of middle-class voters moved mainly by economic considerations and anti-Communism.

The South had been in effect a Third World country within the United States, and that changed with the post-war economic boom. As Clay Risen put it in the New York Times: “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 GOP. 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.” The mythmakers would have you believe that it was the opposite: that your white-hooded hillbilly trailer-dwelling tornado-bait voters jumped ship because LBJ signed a civil-rights bill (passed on the strength of disproportionately Republican support in Congress). The facts suggest otherwise.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What a crock. The National Review is FOS for publishing that crap.
The south still is home to the poorest states in the Union. And if the majority ( working class whites and Blacks} stayed democrats after your fictious BOON era how did the South suddenly turn republican red?

I knew you wouldn't read the truth or reality, but I posted it anyway...just in case you had a moment of clarity.....

I read the right wing hash and I did not buy it. I was alive in 1964 and I remember what happened quite clearly... I am an eyewitness to history!

 

[Jroc]

No, but bill clinton was good friends with democrats who did...orval faubus, and william j. fulbright, giving them awards and dedicating statues to them....and obama....he sat in a racist church for 20 years and is good friends with the racist pastor jeremiah wright and has had racist al sharpton to the White House a whole bunch.....and the democrats had Senator robert byrd....an actual member of the ku klux klan as a senior member of their party and he only died just recently.......

The democrat party is the party of racism...always has been always will be....

Oh, shut up! In reality, BOTH parties can be called racist... hell, the whole damn country is racist if you really want to go there. Always was
and always WILL be. A few God fearing Black Christians adhered to the altruistic concepts of their bible and GOD evidently thought BLACK PRAYERS MATTER. See how he turned those evil democrat racists around and made them serve their former slaves? And the racist demons jumped out of the democrats and went right into the RepubliKLANS! Heh heh heh!

Absurd. Racist democrats joining the party who freed the slaves and ended Jim Crow? I have to school you people every day now? Accept your heritage and vow to change your ways of keeping folks on your plantation.

No, it is NOT absurd, it is historical fact. Many Racist democrats, including Ronald Reagan, did indeed join the party who freed the slaves and ended Jim Crow. Accept YOUR heritage and change your way of hoodwinking low information White males and ensnaring them in your web of lies.

Storm Thurmond was the only Dixiecrat who switched parties. And he did no harm to black citizens. The rest died democrats. Also, name one piece of legislation the GOP passed that supported slavery or Jim Crow laws. All laws of this nature came from the Democrat Party.

Who said anything about the Dixie-crats? I am talking about something far larger than a few measly politicans dubbed the Dixie-crats. I am talking about a signifiant political shift occurring in the South among White people in general. Fuck the few politicians you seem to be focused on. For the former confederate states to suddenly turn Red (Republican) in the mid-sixties almost overnight, millions of southern White voters had to abandon the Democratic Party and join the Republican Party. Do you think they left their Southern conservatism behind as well? If you do, you are too far gone to reach... loco...uninformed.... dumb.... ignorant.

Nothing happens over night. You're the one who is misinformed you've been brainwashed by the leftist propaganda. Carter swept the south, and Clinton won more of the south than Bush the 1st. Learn something before you post. You cant live on liberal taking points alone

 

[Jroc]

And what exactly would have been the reason for racists to join the Republican party...with this as their platform...

The Republican platform in 1964 was hardly catnip for Klansmen: It spoke of the Johnson administration’s failure to help further the “just aspirations of the minority groups” and blasted the president for his refusal “to apply Republican-initiated retraining programs where most needed, particularly where they could afford new economic opportunities to Negro citizens.” Other planks in the platform included: “improvements of civil rights statutes adequate to changing needs of our times; such additional administrative or legislative actions as may be required to end the denial, for whatever unlawful reason, of the right to vote; continued opposition to discrimination based on race, creed, national origin or sex.” And Goldwater’s fellow Republicans ran on a 1964 platform demanding “full implementation and faithful execution of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and all other civil rights statutes, to assure equal rights and opportunities guaranteed by the Constitution to every citizen.” Some dog whistle.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

I am still waiting for a clear direct answer. Your deflection is well noted!

Why did the the South turn solidly republican red after the mid 1960s?

it didint..

 

[Jroc]

Sadly for the left, and the democrats, a little thing called the internet was invented. With the internet their big lies....The political parties switched sides on racism, nazis are right wing, the southern strategy.....are all easily shown to be the lies that they are.....and that is why they now hate the internet...it used to be they could speak a lie, then the press and hollywood would just repeat it over and over....now....they speak a lie and the truth comes right out at them....

Ok... you misinformed goat... I'll ask the question that many smart people have asked you dimwits 999 times and got no response. I guess you will make it 1000. Ready?
Why did the southern states suddenly turn republican red in the mid sixties after decades of being democratic blue? If you can explain that with any degree of reasonable competence I will gladly capitulate.

And more... so you don't have to go to the link...but I would suggest that you do...

And their strongest piece of evidence for that belief was that Republican support in the South was not among poor whites or the old elites — the two groups that tended to hold the most retrograde beliefs on race — but among the emerging southern middle class, a fact recently documented by professors Byron Shafer and Richard Johnston in The End of Southern Exceptionalism: Class, Race, and Partisan Change in the Postwar South (Harvard University Press, 2006). Which is to say: The Republican rise in the South was contemporaneous with the decline of race as the most important political question and tracked the rise of middle-class voters moved mainly by economic considerations and anti-Communism.

The South had been in effect a Third World country within the United States, and that changed with the post-war economic boom. As Clay Risen put it in the New York Times: “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 GOP. 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.” The mythmakers would have you believe that it was the opposite: that your white-hooded hillbilly trailer-dwelling tornado-bait voters jumped ship because LBJ signed a civil-rights bill (passed on the strength of disproportionately Republican support in Congress). The facts suggest otherwise.

Read more at: The Party of Civil Rights | National Review Online

What a crock. The National Review is FOS for publishing that crap.
The south still is home to the poorest states in the Union. And if the majority ( working class whites and Blacks} stayed democrats after your fictious BOON era how did the South suddenly turn republican red?

I knew you wouldn't read the truth or reality, but I posted it anyway...just in case you had a moment of clarity.....

I read the right wing hash and I did not buy it. I was alive in 1964 and I remember what happened quite clearly... I am an eyewitness to history!

Congratulations, i grew up in Detroit, not around any Jews, mostly minorities. My high school was 70% black. Why do you leftist want black people stuck in failing schools? why no school choice? Do you understand the meaning of the word liberty? I don't think you do actually. For an old guy you don't know very much