Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Conflating the events of over half a century ago with the present day is exactly what you're doing. Try reading over the last few posts Lyle. They happened a few days ago now so they've already fallen off your shelf. The only actual coherent point you make is that North Carolina now has enough Democratic voters to vote Democratic. That's mainly due to the concentration of the financial industry there over recent years. It means lots of educated people from the shoe-wearing regions of the country have moved there and they overwhelmingly vote Democratic.
As far as changes in voting patterns in the south go here's a nice little summary for you. There are endless much longer in depth articles but there's zero chance you'll ever read one:
But a couple of researchers recently found some: Gallup poll data starting in the late 50s that asks if you’d be willing to vote for a qualified presidential candidate who happened to be black. Respondents who answered no were coded (quite reasonably) as racially conservative. They then looked at differences between the Democratic Party ID of Southern whites who were and weren’t racially conservative. Here’s their conclusion: We find that except for issues involving racial integration and discrimination, whites in the South and elsewhere have indistinguishable preferences on both domestic and foreign policy in the 1950s….We find no evidence that white Southerners who have negative views of women, Catholics or Jews differentially leave the Democratic party in 1963;
the exodus is specific to those who are racially conservative. Finally, we
find no role for Southern economic development in explaining dealignment.
The charts on the right show one specific data point: JFK’s televised civil rights speech of June 11, 1963. Among Southern whites, approval of JFK plummets right at that moment (top chart). And in the Gallup polls, racially conservative Southern whites leave the party in droves (bottom chart). This is not a steady decline. It’s a sharp, sudden exodus at a specific moment in time.
So: why did Democrats lose the white South? For the reason common sense and all the evidence suggests: because the party became too liberal on civil rights, and racist white Southerners didn’t like it. Southern white flight from the party began in the 1940s, took a sharp dive in the early 60s, and continued to decline for several decades after as Democrats became ever more committed to black equality. This might not be the only reason for Southern realignment, but it’s surely the most important by a long stretch.
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dr...e-white-south/
And don't complain about the source. It's a factual piece referencing poll data, facts and evidence. Once the Democratic party came out for equal rights for black people white southerners started leaving it in droves. That's it in a nutshell Lyle.
OK keep being belligerent I guess
"Little shelf, my 10 year old niece, shoe-wearing regions of the country" just nothing but hostility from you ALL THE TIME....not complaining, just pointing it out in case anyone else missed it though I'd find it hard to believe they would.
All I've done is
DARE to ask you to follow up on the claims you make about the South being racist which YES absolute you have said that and you're continuing to say it right now.
"The north/south vote breakdown is about as clear as you can get, isn't it. I rest my case."
That's Republican AND Democrat votes and that's YOUR quote saying the whole South, both parties, were racist.
These people you talk about haven't moved anywhere and only 1 Democrat turned Republican which apparently proves you right about the "Southern strategy"
and that dude was in SOUTH Carolina. To expound on that a bit, you never did get back to what Strom Thurmond did in the wake of Willie Earle being lynched, but that's cool it's another story for another day when you apparently feel like answering questions instead of being a hostile jackass.
OK so banking brings in "shoe wearing people" (because that's not insulting to myself or my state) and MAGICALLY Democrats become LESS racist than Republicans who now OWN racism in the South and everywhere else according to you.
Neither you or the author of the 'Mother Jones' article (shocking you'd use them again) define what constitutes "racially conservative". Define the term, how does one become "racially conservative" how do you define it? If you'd kindly define your term then maybe your fucking graphs would mean something.
I really would enjoy hearing this kind of thing from you live in person, it would amuse me a great deal.
Bookmarks