The Left Does not Reason

[JohnDonne]

Can someone lay out the party switch theory.

In the 1860s and 70s Republicans and Democrats vied for the new western states. The republican federal expansions were good for big businesses like banks and railroads but they left the farmers out west with little. Both parties wished to seize the new voting bloc, so they tried to appeal to the westerners through federally funded social programs and benefits. The Democrats stuck with this strategy, while republicans slowly went counter for hands off government. Republicans essentially remained a party of big business though, because once all the infrastructure was finished big businesses didn't want big government anymore. In the 1930s the Republican position was hardened by the opposition to the New Deal.

So your argument is policy based not personnel based ?

I was just outlining how the Republicans went from big gov to small gov, I'm not trying to argue policy verse personnel. I don't even think those are mutually exclusive.

When I think about it, it''s not surprising that the South, which was defeated by the Federal government, would always be represented by the party of small government. In any case, I only claim that it is regional culture that defines the parties which control (or rather caters to) them, not the other way around. It's plain to see that the spirit of the 1860s Democrats is alive and well in the Southern Republicans of today.

Just to put a point on it, if the Democrat party is the same as then, why don't those modern confederate flag wavers vote Democrat so that the South will rise again? Why do they look to the Republican party for their leadership, the ones you claim destroyed their way of life?

[TheReal_ND]

Yeah. I really hate this "Dems are the real racists" argument. I call it DR3. Now they are doing the same thing calling anarchists and communists fascists. The history is interesting regarding the dem/rep switch but it doesn't work like a shield for republicans who are always, always trying, oh so hard to not be the real racists (even though things like border control are implicitly racist if not at the least culturally favoring.) It's pretty fucking weak. Democrats don't give a fuck dude.

[TheReal_ND]

Oh and I'm done with this "not punching to the right" meme. Some of the people on the right are just as much traitors to the American people as democrats are. I'm not going to forget that.

[clubgop]

What I don't get is why you are taking out your rage on your MHF brethren?

We who gather to discuss the events of this crazy time here in our forum...

We are your closest allies.

None of us are defending this.

We are simply challenging each other for the sake of clarifying our thinking... it's like a martial arts training centre here... we are not the enemy.

Don't confuse your sparring mates with the source of the problem.

We spar here to win out there.

Gcf is defending it. He likes the violence he enjoys it he wishes to see more of it. He just said so. As for that last part. You suck at sparring cause you sure aint doing any winning fuckface.

Uhhhh ok?

You are trying to goad StA to go there and get beaten up by a riotus mob cause you wanna watch it. You think its all a joke. Conservatives with guns are a geniuine fear for you I have seen act with passion and emotion to disarm them but a leftist riotus mob and make a joke of it. We see your bullshit. These are your people, your leaders and you know it.

[clubgop]

Yeah. I really hate this "Dems are the real racists" argument. I call it DR3. Now they are doing the same thing calling anarchists and communists fascists. The history is interesting regarding the dem/rep switch but it doesn't work like a shield for republicans who are always, always trying, oh so hard to not be the real racists (even though things like border control are implicitly racist if not at the least culturally favoring.) It's pretty fucking weak. Democrats don't give a fuck dude.

What the fuck are you on about? There was no switch.

[clubgop]

Just to put a point on it, if the Democrat party is the same as then, why don't those modern confederate flag wavers vote Democrat so that the South will rise again? Why do they look to the Republican party for their leadership, the ones you claim destroyed their way of life?

So now the change didnt happen in 1860 or 1870? The current kerfluffle about the Confederate flag started in the 1950s by segregationist Democrats according to your history they should still be Democrats.

[TheReal_ND]

Yeah. I really hate this "Dems are the real racists" argument. I call it DR3. Now they are doing the same thing calling anarchists and communists fascists. The history is interesting regarding the dem/rep switch but it doesn't work like a shield for republicans who are always, always trying, oh so hard to not be the real racists (even though things like border control are implicitly racist if not at the least culturally favoring.) It's pretty fucking weak. Democrats don't give a fuck dude.

What the fuck are you on about? There was no switch.

Except in the south you ignorant fuck.

[clubgop]

Yeah. I really hate this "Dems are the real racists" argument. I call it DR3. Now they are doing the same thing calling anarchists and communists fascists. The history is interesting regarding the dem/rep switch but it doesn't work like a shield for republicans who are always, always trying, oh so hard to not be the real racists (even though things like border control are implicitly racist if not at the least culturally favoring.) It's pretty fucking weak. Democrats don't give a fuck dude.

What the fuck are you on about? There was no switch.

Except in the south you ignorant fuck.

Except not you ignorant fuck. Its a myth.

[TheReal_ND]

Sure it is Jew.

[C-Mag]

In the 1860s and 70s Republicans and Democrats vied for the new western states. The republican federal expansions were good for big businesses like banks and railroads but they left the farmers out west with little. Both parties wished to seize the new voting bloc, so they tried to appeal to the westerners through federally funded social programs and benefits. The Democrats stuck with this strategy, while republicans slowly went counter for hands off government. Republicans essentially remained a party of big business though, because once all the infrastructure was finished big businesses didn't want big government anymore. In the 1930s the Republican position was hardened by the opposition to the New Deal.

So your argument is policy based not personnel based ?

I was just outlining how the Republicans went from big gov to small gov, I'm not trying to argue policy verse personnel. I don't even think those are mutually exclusive.

When I think about it, it''s not surprising that the South, which was defeated by the Federal government, would always be represented by the party of small government. In any case, I only claim that it is regional culture that defines the parties which control (or rather caters to) them, not the other way around. It's plain to see that the spirit of the 1860s Democrats is alive and well in the Southern Republicans of today.

Just to put a point on it, if the Democrat party is the same as then, why don't those modern confederate flag wavers vote Democrat so that the South will rise again? Why do they look to the Republican party for their leadership, the ones you claim destroyed their way of life?

Good response, I will get back to you tomorrow.