We are witnessing the invention of the "bloodbath" hoax in real-time Unfortunately for them, we have the facts!

[otto105]

You obviously didn't read ALL of my comments where I wrote:
Just remember ... the biased MSM conflates Trump's "bloodbath" with violence if Biden is re-elected... WHICH IS A LIE!
Trump was speaking about if the Chinese build these auto plants it will be a "bloodbath" in terms of American economy! Total FACT!
Trump would put a 100% tariff on the Chinese autos which would obviously be paid for by Americans who stupidly buy these Chinese made EVs.
So in case you still don't understand...
Biden is pushing for Chinese EVs and EVEN if some idiot buys the Chinese EV thinking that they are helping climate change,
THEY will have to pay that TARIFF! OBVIOUSLY!
Idiots like Biden has made executive orders to:

FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces Steps to Drive American Leadership Forward on Clean Cars and Trucks​

President Biden Outlines Target of 50% Electric Vehicle Sales Share in 2030 to Unleash Full Economic Benefits of Build Back Better Agenda and Advance Smart Fuel Efficiency and Emission Standards
Specifically, the President will sign an Executive Order that sets an ambitious new target to make half of all new vehicles sold in 2030 zero-emissions vehicles, including battery electric, plug-in hybrid electric, or fuel cell electric vehicles.

FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces Steps to Drive American Leadership Forward on Clean Cars and Trucks | The White House

President Biden Outlines Target of 50% Electric Vehicle Sales Share in 2030 to Unleash Full Economic Benefits of Build Back Better Agenda and Advance

www.whitehouse.gov

But this idiot President told Americans that I guarantee We Are Going To Get Rid of Fossil Fuels” September 06, 2019,


So while this dummy guaranteed to "RID of Fossil fuels" that means shutting down 61% of all electric generating plants...
that means 61% of the 4,230,000,000,000 kWh or 2,580,300,000,000 kWh, and shutting down the 3,400 fossil fuel plants.

What is Generation Capacity?

Capacity is the amount of electricity a generator can produce when it's running at full blast. Learn more about this confusing energy term.

www.energy.gov

So this dummy Biden wants to ADD electricity usage by the way that is
1) average American driver drive 14,263 miles per year
https://www.thezebra.com/resources/driving/average-miles-driven-per-year/#:~:text=On average, Americans drive 14,263,to the Federal Highway Administration.
2) The average EV uses 0.35 kWh per mile or 4,992 kWh per year

How much electricity does an electric car use? | Edmunds

Before you can figure out how much it costs to charge an electric car at home, follow these steps to determine how much electricity they use.

www.edmunds.com

3) To meet Dummy's goal of "50% Electric Vehicle Sales Share in 2030"
The average number of cars sold per year is :Total 2022 full-year sales of 13,903,429 units so by 2030 that would be
48,662,001new cars each using 4,992 kWh or 242,923,144,588 kWh ADDED to the reduced due to dummy's guarantee to
" rid the 3,400 fossil fuels electric power plants"

New Car Sales by State - Full Year 2023 Vehicle Sales Report

Vehicle sales by state USA 2023 full year data. Top states ranked by new car sales units. Sort by state rank: 1) California 2) Texas 3) Florida.

www.factorywarrantylist.com

So tell me where will this addition nearly 2,823,223,144,588 kWh...come from?

Hilarious

The former fuckup still thinks Ghina pays the tariffs.

 

[Road Runner]

Ummm, that is you retards who are lying about what he said.

Just sayin....

Actually they're not lying about what he said just the context used is a lie but that still makes a really big difference nonetheless.

 

[Winco]

Why would supply of new cars decline dramatically?



Man you people are dumb as rocks.

Dear Lord.

Since you speak trump and clearly translate for trump.

Can you tell us which cars trump will put a 100% tariff upon.

 

[Doc7505]

Just amazing how they can get away convincing millions (and you know who you are) about something Trump didn't say, other than talking about the U.S. auto industry.

And all the while they use the same phrase.

It's this month's 'vermin' for them.

~~~~~~

With New 'Bloodbath' Claim Against Trump, We're Watching 'Hoax-Making In Progress'​

With New 'Bloodbath' Claim Against Trump, We're Watching 'Hoax-Making In Progress'

redstate.com

17 Mat 2024 ~~ By Nick Arama


I have a basic rule of thumb: Any time you hear a wild story about former President Donald Trump where the media is claiming he said something/did something outrageous, wait 48 hours, and then the spin or the truth on the matter will be revealed.
We've seen the fake stories before, like the "fine people" hoax. Joe Biden is still spreading that lie to this day when he talks about his reasons for running for office.
On Saturday, you could watch the making of a hoax in real time. In the latest fake story that the media, the Biden campaign, and their fellow travelers are pushing about Trump, we don't even have to wait that long, as the lie is obvious from the in-context video.
Here's one of the main accounts that started spreading the b.s. out-of-context edited video. It has more than 13 million views and it's still up, without correction.

**********
​

~Snip~
But so far, none of the major posts spreading the hoax have gotten a Community Note, so that's a problem. That is a very helpful system for blowing up such fakery. At this point, the left knows they're in trouble, so they're going to go all in against Trump, even with easily debunked lies, because they know there are so many people who will never check or who will just accept the lie. And they have nothing else at this point to help their doddering Biden over the finish line.


Commentary:
This has been a constant, daily occurrence during PDJT’s first term. amd beyond.
If Democrat Neo-Marxists couldn’t take things out of context, they’d just flat make things up completely out of thin air.
Deplorably, millions of Dem masses of sheep will eat it with a spoon,

 

[rightwinger]

When did you have your brainectomy?

 

[rightwinger]

Why would supply of new cars decline dramatically?



Man you people are dumb as rocks.

Is that the Bloodbath part?

 

[Leo123]

Dear Lord.

Since you speak trump and clearly translate for trump.

Can you tell us which cars trump will put a 100% tariff upon.

Xi cars made in the Mexican plants that will never be built if Trump is elected.

 

[krichton]

^^ typical leftwing misinformation. Using a quote out of context and using a photo unrelated making it look like he was screaming it.


He used the words in a calm collective speech.


Also, used the correct word for the economic situation being described.


View attachment 918623

China opening a car factory in mexico would be a major economic disaster for us? Who needs nukes anymore? Just sell cars!

 

[otto105]

Xi cars made in the Mexican plants that will never be built if Trump is elected.

How so?

 

[Road Runner]

China opening a car factory in mexico would be a major economic disaster for us? Who needs nukes anymore? Just sell cars!

I really hate to admit it, but you do make a valid point.

 

[krichton]

A bloodbath is often referred to as an economic disaster, which is what President Trump was referring to in his speech. President Trump was discussing the Automobile industry and referred to the future of the automobile industry as a bloodbath if he were to not be re-elected. ​

​

Definition of BLOODBATH

a great slaughter; a notably fierce, violent, or destructive contest or struggle; a major economic disaster… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

​

I still don't get how china opening a car factory in mexico would be an economic disaster, but carry on

 

[rightwinger]

China opening a car factory in mexico would be a major economic disaster for us? Who needs nukes anymore? Just sell cars!

China opening a car factory in Mexico means more good paying jobs in Mexico and less need to migrate to the US

 

[Road Runner]

I still don't get how china opening a car factory in mexico would be an economic disaster, but carry on

I sort of see what they're saying but I do believe that it's an exaggeration.

 

[YoursTruly]

No he didn't. That's a whole bunch of BS.

He did ALL of those things. And more. FFS, he even tried to give blacks $500 Billion (with a B) in reparations. His "Platinum Plan."

$8 trillion spent. No one, including Trump denies that one.
Unconstitutional legislation he signed:

1. FISA 702 (warrantless spying on Americans)
2. Patriot Act that gives government officials the authority to trespass without a warrant
3. NDAA A slush fund that give the president the authority to go to war without a formal declaration.

Assaulting our 2A. The banning of bump stocks. Luckily a constitutional judge deemed that as unconstitutional and reversed Trumps ban. But he still did it.
And Trump publicly stated "I like taking the guns first. Then do due process later."

First covid mandates: Thanks to an EO, Trump mandated that citizens were not allowed to see their loved ones in nursing homes or hospitals during covid.
It was also his EO that forced landlords to go without rent for a year.
Then, after he allowed Fauci to do all the BS he did, on Trumps last day in office, he gave him a commendation.

Everything I've stated is FACT. Backed up with links to mostly government records. But I doubt you'll even care. Because "The concept of Trump is much better than Trump himself."

You and 90% of the other GOP voters have been conned by a life long democrat, with a good sales pitch.

 

[2aguy]

Hilarious

As those same people enjoyed the Nixon southern strategy.

The Southern Strategy lie is the same tactic the democrats have been using for decades...

Perhaps it was the Nixon’s Southern Strategy. That does seem to be a more common explanation these days than the Dixiecrats. But Nixon’s Southern Strategy never actually happened. He did not campaign in the Deep South, but on the outskirts of the South. His strategy was the Sunbelt Strategy, which went from parts of Florida to California. Much of the south was outside where he actually campaigned.
On August 23, 2018, The Hill, published an opinion piece by Dinesh D’Souza, The myth of Nixon’s ‘Southern Strategy’ which stated:

Nixon recognized the South was changing. It was becoming more industrialized, with many northerners moving to the Sunbelt. Nixon’s focus, Phillips writes, was on the non-racist, upwardly-mobile, largely urban voters of the Outer or Peripheral South. Nixon won these voters, and he lost the Deep South, which went to Democratic segregationist George Wallace.

In 1968, Nixon did not take a single state considered Deep South. Segregationist, George Wallace, took the Deep South. Hubert Humphry, the Democrats’ nominee, took Texas. This map shows just how well Nixon’s strategy worked and exactly who the Deep South voted for.

Reagan is claimed to have used a continuation of Nixon’s Southern Strategy that never was. For Reagan, considering the states he won, it was more of an American strategy, beating Carter 489 electoral votes to 49.
Every claim Democrats make about the parties switching is not based on truth. Divisiveness and propaganda are the only things the Democrats have, and it continues to be very effective.


When did the Parties Switch on Civil Rights?
=====
http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-myth-of-the-racist-republicans/

Electoral Patterns
In all these ways, the gop appears as the national party of the middle-class, not of white solidarity. And it is this interpretation, and not the myth, that is supported by the voting results. The myth's proponents highlight, and distort, a few key electoral facts: Southern white backlash was most heated in the 1960s, especially in the Deep South. It was then and there that the GOP finally broke through in the South, on the strength of Goldwater's appeals to states' rights. Democrats never again won the votes of most Southern whites. So Goldwater is said to have provided the electoral model for the GOP.

But hidden within these aggregate results are patterns that make no sense if white solidarity really was the basis for the GOP's advance. These patterns concern which Southern votes the GOP attracted, and when. How did the GOP's Southern advance actually unfold? We can distinguish between two sub-regions. The Peripheral South—Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, and Arkansas—contained many growing, urbanizing "New South" areas and much smaller black populations. Race loomed less large in its politics. In the more rural, and poorer, Deep South—Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana —black communities were much larger, and racial conflict was much more acute in the 1950s and '60s. Tellingly, the presidential campaigns of Strom Thurmond, Goldwater, and Wallace all won a majority of white votes in the Deep South but lost the white vote in the Peripheral South.

4/30/18

https://www.dailywire.com/news/30054/note-kanye-no-republicans-didnt-turn-party-racism-ben-shapiro

Sean Trende of RealClearPolitics agrees: he says that the GOP gradually increased its support in the south from 1928 to 2010. As Dan McLaughlin summarizes, “As late as 2010, there were still states like Alabama and North Carolina that were voting in their first Republican legislative majorities since Reconstruction — something that would have happened overnight in the late 60s if the partisan realignment had been driven by lockstep white voting loyalties on racial lines.”
Second, it was southern Democrats fighting against the Civil Rights movement for the most part. In 1948 and 1968, insurgent Democrats launched anti-civil rights presidential campaigns. Civil rights bills required more Republican than Democratic support.
Finally, the myth of the southern strategy also suggests that today’s southerners vote for Republicans because they’re more racist than northerners. There’s no evidence to that effect, either. According to Gallup, “Southern Americans' ratings of race relations are currently about average when compared with those in other parts of the country.” The most segregated areas of the south are in major metropolitan areas — which tend to vote more heavily Democratic than their surrounding areas.
So don’t believe the hype, Kanye. The racist Democrats who propelled Democrats to victory remained Democrats.

 

[2aguy]

What you refuse to acknowledge is that slavery was a Southern Redneck Conservative thing. Not a Liberal thing.
Those so-called Dixiecrats no longer exist.
They are and always have been your people.

Use the word (D) all you want. Yes, these conservatives were (D) back then,
Facts show that today's conservatives are the ones that supported racism, and STILL do today.
View attachment 918619

No....slavery was definitely a democrat party thing, since the democrat party was founded by two slave owners......

The Dixiecrats never left the democrat party

The Republican party was created by conservative religious people in order to end slavery....they also fought the democrats to pass Civil Rights for black Americans...

The lie about dixie crats changing parties...

What happened to all those racist Dixiecrats that, according to the progressive narrative, all picked up their tents and moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party? Actually, they exist only in the progressive imagination.

This is the world not as it is but as progressives wish it to be. Of all the Dixiecrats who broke away from the Democratic Party in 1948, of all the bigots and segregationists who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, I count just two—one in the Senate and one in the House—who switched from Democrat to Republican.

In the Senate, that solitary figure was Strom Thurmond. In the House, Albert Watson. The constellation of racist Dixiecrats includes Senators William Murray, Thomas P. Gore, Spessard Holland, Sam Ervin, Russell Long, Robert Byrd, Richard Russell, Olin Johnston, Lister Hill, John C. Stennis, John Sparkman, John McClellan, James Eastland, Herman Talmadge, Herbert Walters, Harry F. Byrd, George Smathers, Everett Jordan, Allen Ellender, A. Willis Robertson, Al Gore Sr., William Fulbright, Herbert Walters, W. Kerr Scott, and Marion Price Daniels.

The list of Dixiecrat governors includes William H. Murray, Frank Dixon, Fielding Wright, and Benjamin Laney. I don’t have space to include the list of Dixiecrat congressmen and other officials. Suffice to say it is a long list. And from this entire list we count only two defections.

Thus the progressive conventional wisdom that the racist Dixiecrats became Republicans is exposed as a big lie.

The Dixiecrats remained in the Democratic Party for years, in some cases decades. Not once did the Democrats repudiate them or attempt to push them out.


Segregationists like Richard Russell and William Fulbright were lionized in their party throughout their lifetimes, as of course was Robert Byrd, who died in 2010 and was eulogized by leading Democrats and the progressive media.

The Switch That Never Happened: How the South Really Went GOP › American Greatness
===========

 

[otto105]

The Southern Strategy lie is the same tactic the democrats have been using for decades...

Perhaps it was the Nixon’s Southern Strategy. That does seem to be a more common explanation these days than the Dixiecrats. But Nixon’s Southern Strategy never actually happened. He did not campaign in the Deep South, but on the outskirts of the South. His strategy was the Sunbelt Strategy, which went from parts of Florida to California. Much of the south was outside where he actually campaigned.
On August 23, 2018, The Hill, published an opinion piece by Dinesh D’Souza, The myth of Nixon’s ‘Southern Strategy’ which stated:

In 1968, Nixon did not take a single state considered Deep South. Segregationist, George Wallace, took the Deep South. Hubert Humphry, the Democrats’ nominee, took Texas. This map shows just how well Nixon’s strategy worked and exactly who the Deep South voted for.

Reagan is claimed to have used a continuation of Nixon’s Southern Strategy that never was. For Reagan, considering the states he won, it was more of an American strategy, beating Carter 489 electoral votes to 49.
Every claim Democrats make about the parties switching is not based on truth. Divisiveness and propaganda are the only things the Democrats have, and it continues to be very effective.


When did the Parties Switch on Civil Rights?
=====
http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-myth-of-the-racist-republicans/

Electoral Patterns
In all these ways, the gop appears as the national party of the middle-class, not of white solidarity. And it is this interpretation, and not the myth, that is supported by the voting results. The myth's proponents highlight, and distort, a few key electoral facts: Southern white backlash was most heated in the 1960s, especially in the Deep South. It was then and there that the GOP finally broke through in the South, on the strength of Goldwater's appeals to states' rights. Democrats never again won the votes of most Southern whites. So Goldwater is said to have provided the electoral model for the GOP.

But hidden within these aggregate results are patterns that make no sense if white solidarity really was the basis for the GOP's advance. These patterns concern which Southern votes the GOP attracted, and when. How did the GOP's Southern advance actually unfold? We can distinguish between two sub-regions. The Peripheral South—Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, and Arkansas—contained many growing, urbanizing "New South" areas and much smaller black populations. Race loomed less large in its politics. In the more rural, and poorer, Deep South—Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana —black communities were much larger, and racial conflict was much more acute in the 1950s and '60s. Tellingly, the presidential campaigns of Strom Thurmond, Goldwater, and Wallace all won a majority of white votes in the Deep South but lost the white vote in the Peripheral South.

4/30/18

https://www.dailywire.com/news/30054/note-kanye-no-republicans-didnt-turn-party-racism-ben-shapiro

Sean Trende of RealClearPolitics agrees: he says that the GOP gradually increased its support in the south from 1928 to 2010. As Dan McLaughlin summarizes, “As late as 2010, there were still states like Alabama and North Carolina that were voting in their first Republican legislative majorities since Reconstruction — something that would have happened overnight in the late 60s if the partisan realignment had been driven by lockstep white voting loyalties on racial lines.”
Second, it was southern Democrats fighting against the Civil Rights movement for the most part. In 1948 and 1968, insurgent Democrats launched anti-civil rights presidential campaigns. Civil rights bills required more Republican than Democratic support.
Finally, the myth of the southern strategy also suggests that today’s southerners vote for Republicans because they’re more racist than northerners. There’s no evidence to that effect, either. According to Gallup, “Southern Americans' ratings of race relations are currently about average when compared with those in other parts of the country.” The most segregated areas of the south are in major metropolitan areas — which tend to vote more heavily Democratic than their surrounding areas.
So don’t believe the hype, Kanye. The racist Democrats who propelled Democrats to victory remained Democrats.

Hilariously wrong fuckup

Nixon knew those southern racists would come home to the racist republic party after the Civil Rights Law and Voting Rights decision.

Just look at those conservative judges on the political Supreme Court working to gut it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Now here is what Trump's actually words he SAID after which the BIASED and dishonest MSM makes this the below headlines.


“We’re going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you’re not going to be able to sell those cars if I get elected,” Trump said. "Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars. They’re building massive factories."

Social media captures full context of Trump’s ‘bloodbath’ comment

Former President Donald Trump‘s speech Saturday had a clip go viral when he suggested the automobile industry will undergo a “bloodbath” if he’s not reelected. Trump was in Dayton, Ohio,

gazette.com

Now I watched Trump's actual words in this video from X (Twitter) and the context was in conjunction with China financing construction of gigantic auto making plants in Mexico.
NOTE: Not one major MSM, NBC,CBS,ABC, put the term "bloodbath" in context...i.e. if Trump's not elected.. a " It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it."... meaning economically! But dummies like the Democrat backed MSM in an effort to BIAS the story don't tell the whole context!

SEE FACT:
Major U.S. automakers have warned that Chinese cars could spell doom for their own prospects, among them Elon Musk's Tesla.
Last month, Tesla's chief executive predicted that Chinese automakers will "demolish" global rivals without trade barriers.
Musk's view is echoed by a leading advocacy group.
"The introduction of cheap Chinese autos – which are so inexpensive because they are backed with the power and funding of the Chinese government – to the American market could end up being an extinction-level event for the U.S. auto sector," according to a forthcoming report by the group Alliance for American Manufacturing.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/chinas-byd-plans-new-electric-vehicle-plant-mexico-says-nikkei-2024-02-13/

This was what Trump was alluding to in his "bloodbath" context because without electing Trump, Biden and the anti-American Democrats would WELCOME Chinese EV car makers as it would do what Biden wants and the BIASED MSM doesn't share with Americans!
Biden's guarantee to " I guarantee We Are Going To Get Rid of Fossil Fuels” September 06, 2019, 5:49 PM



Just remember ... the biased MSM conflates Trump's "bloodbath" with violence if Biden is re-elected... WHICH IS A LIE!
Trump was speaking about if the Chinese build these auto plants it will be a "bloodbath" in terms of American economy! Total FACT!
Trump would put a 100% tariff on the Chinese autos which would obviously be paid for by Americans who stupidly buy these Chinese made EVs.

The Legacy media is dead

 

[2aguy]

Hilariously wrong fuckup

Nixon knew those southern racists would come home to the racist republic party after the Civil Rights Law and Voting Rights decision.

Just look at those conservative judges on the political Supreme Court working to gut it.

Wrong, dumb fuck......

the creator of the southern strategy was rejected….

see page 4, bottom of first column...

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/books/phillips-southern.pdf



http://blackquillandink.com/?p=6082

On the Southern Strategy lie itself......
The "Southern Strategy" is a Lie | Pundit House

Believe it or not, the entire myth was created by an unknown editor at the New York Times who didn’t do his job and read a story he was given to edit.

On May 17, 1970, the New York Times published an article written by James Boyd. The headline, written by our unknown editor, was “Nixon’s Southern Strategy: It’s All in the Charts.”

The article was about a very controversial political analyst named Kevin Phillips. Phillips believed that everyone voted according to their ethnic background, not according to their individual beliefs. And all a candidate had to do is frame their message according to whatever moves a particular ethnic group.

Phillips offered his services to the Nixon campaign. But if our unknown editor had bothered to read the story completely, he would’ve seen that Phillip’s and his theory was completely rejected!

Boyd wrote in his article, “Though Phillips’s ideas for an aggressive anti-liberal campaign strategy that would hasten defection of the working-class democrats to the republicans did not prevail in the 1968 campaign, he won the respect John Mitchell.” (Mitchell was a well-known Washington insider at the time).

A lazy, negligent editor partially read the story. And wrote a headline for it that attributed Nixon’s campaign success–to a plan he rejected.

In fact, Phillips isn’t even mentioned in Nixon’s memoirs.

Is all of this the result of a negligent copy editor at the New York Times? Or did they purposely work with the Democrat Party to create this myth? That has crossed my mind and it’s certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.

********

The "Southern Strategy" is a Lie | Pundit House

Ken Raymond
Jun 2011

Richard Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”, which the democrats say is the reason black people had to support them during the 1960′s–is a lie.

And it’s probably the biggest lie that’s been told to the blacks since Woodrow Wilson segregated the federal government after getting the NAACP to support him.
After talking with black voters across the country about why they overwhelmingly supports democrats, the common answer that’s emerges is the Southern Strategy.

I’ve heard of the Southern Strategy too. But since it doesn’t make a difference in how I decide to vote, I never bothered to research it. But apparently it still influences how many African Americans vote today. That makes it worth investigating.

For those that might be unfamiliar with the Southern Strategy, I’ll briefly review the story. After the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, most blacks registered as democrats and it’s been that way ever since.

And that doesn’t make any sense when you consider the fact that it was the democrats that established, and fought for, Jim Crow laws and segregation in the first place. And the republicans have a very noble history of fighting for the civil rights of blacks.

The reason black people moved to the democrats, given by media pundits and educational institutions for the decades, is that when republican presidential candidate Richard Nixon ran for president in 1968, he employed a racist plan that’s now infamously called the Southern Strategy.

The Southern Strategy basically means Nixon allegedly used hidden code words that appealed to the racists within the Democrat party and throughout the south. This secret language caused a seismic shift in the electoral landscape that moved the evil racist democrats into the republican camp and the noble-hearted republicans into the democrat camp.

And here’s what I found, Nixon did not use a plan to appeal to racist white voters.

First, let’s look at the presidential candidates of 1968. Richard Nixon was the republican candidate; Hubert Humphrey was the democrat nominee; and George Wallace was a third party candidate.

Remember George Wallace? Wallace was the democrat governor of Alabama from 1963 until 1967. And it was Wallace that ordered the Eugene “Bull” Connor, and the police department, to attack Dr. Martin Luther King

Jr. and 2,500 protesters in Montgomery , Alabama in 1965. And it was Governor Wallace that ordered a blockade at the admissions office at the University of Alabama to prevent blacks from enrolling in 1963.

Governor Wallace was a true racist and a determined segregationist. And he ran as the nominee from the American Independent Party, which was he founded.

Richard Nixon wrote about the 1968 campaign in his book RN: the Memoirs of Richard Nixon originally published in 1978.

In his book, Nixon wrote this about campaigning in the south, “The deep south had to be virtually conceded to George Wallace. I could not match him there without compromising on civil rights, which I would not do.”

The media coverage of the 1968 presidential race also showed that Nixon was in favor of the Civil Rights and would not compromise on that issue. For example, in an article published in theWashington Post on September 15, 1968 headlined “Nixon Sped Integration, Wallace says” Wallace declared that Nixon agreed with Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren and played a role in ”the destruction of public school system.” Wallace pledged to restore the school system, in the same article, by giving it back to the states ”lock, stock, and barrel.”

This story, as well as Nixon’s memoirs and other news stories during that campaign, shows that Nixon was very clear about his position on civil rights. And if Nixon was used code words only racists could hear, evidently George Wallace couldn’t hear it.

Among the southern states, George Wallace won Arkansas , Mississippi , Alabama , Georgia and Louisiana . Nixon won North Carolina , South Carolina , Florida , Virginia , and Tennessee . Winning those states were part of Nixon’s plan.

“I would not concede the Carolina ‘s, Florida , or Virginia or the states around the rim of the south,”Nixon wrote. ”These states were a part of my plan.”

At that time, the entire southern region was the poorest in the country. The south consistently lagged behind the rest of the United States in income. And according to the

“U.S. Regional Growth and Convergence,” by Kris James Mitchener and Ian W. McLean, per capita income for southerners was almost half as much as it was for Americans in other regions.

Nixon won those states strictly on economic issues. He focused on increasing tariffs on foreign imports to protect the manufacturing and agriculture industries of those states. Some southern elected officials agreed to support him for the sake of their economies, including South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond.

“I had been consulting privately with Thurmond for several months and I was convinced that he’d join my campaign if he were satisfied on the two issues of paramount concern to him: national defense and tariffs against textile imports to protect South Carolina ‘s position in the industry.”Nixon wrote in his memoirs.

In fact, Nixon made it clear to the southern elected officials that he would not compromise on the civil rights issue.

“On civil rights, Thurmond knew my position was very different from his,” Nixon wrote. “I was for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and he was against it. Although he disagreed with me, he respected my sincerity and candor.”

The same scenario played out among elected officials and voters in other southern states won by Nixon. They laid their feelings aside and supported him because of his economic platform’”not because Nixon sent messages on a frequency only racists can hear.
=================

Nixon had an excellent record on civil rights. He supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He was an avid champion of the desegregation of public schools. The progressive columnist Tom Wicker wrote in the New York Times, “There’s no doubt about it — the Nixon administration accomplished more in 1970 to desegregate Southern school systems than had been done in the 16 previous years or probably since. There’s no doubt either that it was Richard Nixon personally who conceived and led the administration’s desegregation effort.”

Upon his taking office in 1969, Nixon also put into effect America’s first affirmative action program. Dubbed the Philadelphia Plan, it imposed racial goals and timetables on the building trade unions, first in Philadelphia and then elsewhere. Now, would a man seeking to build an electoral base of Deep South white supremacists actually promote the first program to legally discriminate in favor of blacks? This is absurd.

Nixon barely campaigned in the Deep South. His strategy, as outlined by Kevin Phillips in his classic work, “The Emerging Republican Majority,” was to target the Sunbelt, the vast swath of territory stretching from Florida to Nixon’s native California. This included what Phillips terms the Outer or Peripheral South.

Nixon recognized the South was changing. It was becoming more industrialized, with many northerners moving to the Sunbelt. Nixon’s focus, Phillips writes, was on the non-racist, upwardly-mobile, largely urban voters of the Outer or Peripheral South. Nixon won these voters, and he lost the Deep South, which went to Democratic segregationist George Wallace.

And how many racist Dixiecrats did Nixon win for the GOP? Turns out, virtually none. Among the racist Dixiecrats, Strom Thurmond of South Carolina was the sole senator to defect to the Republicans — and he did this long before Nixon’s time. Only one Dixiecrat congressman, Albert Watson of South Carolina, switched to the GOP. The rest, more than 200 Dixiecrat senators, congressmen, governors and high elected officials, all stayed in the Democratic Party.

The progressive notion of a Dixiecrat switch is a myth. Yet it is myth that continues to be promoted, using dubious case examples. Though the late Sens. Jesse Helms of North Carolina and John Tower of Texas and former Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott all switched from the Democratic Party to the GOP, none of these men was a Dixiecrat.

The South, as a whole, became Republican during the 1980s and 1990s. This had nothing to do with Nixon; it was because of Ronald Reagan and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America.” The conservative appeal to patriotism, anti-communism, free markets, pro-life and Christianity had far more to do with the South’s movement into the GOP camp than anything related to race.

Yet the myth of Nixon’s Southern Strategy endures — not because it’s true, but because it conveniently serves to exculpate the crimes of the Democratic Party. Somehow the party that promoted slavery, segregation, Jim Crow and racial terrorism gets to wipe its slate clean by pretending that, with Nixon’s connivance, the Republicans stole all their racists. It’s time we recognize this excuse for what it is: one more Democratic big lie.

The myth of Nixon’s ‘Southern Strategy’

 

[2aguy]

Hilariously wrong fuckup

Nixon knew those southern racists would come home to the racist republic party after the Civil Rights Law and Voting Rights decision.

Just look at those conservative judges on the political Supreme Court working to gut it.

The conservative Justices on the Supreme Court are holding the line against democrats trying to destroy the Constitution, the Bill of Rights...........