#fyrefestival

[clubgop]

It's Wikipedia so be careful. There are some handy charts showing what Presidental was chosen by who Party in what state and when

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South

Posting a wikipedia link without any other text doesn't cut it. Show your work, not a link to fuck knows what.

Well when I'm not using my cell phone I be happy too.

Anyways the article does give support to what l say. Look at it or not. Your choice.

And just how much evldence or support would you like? And would quotes from any books I might have do?

Read the article you lying piece of shit the Solid South was from 1877 to about 1964. There was no goddamned switch. The Solid South was broken up, dead, no longer exists. Some switched parties, some stayed. When Democrats saw an opportunity to put minorities on voting plantations they dropped Jim Crow and Segregation. Answer me this hoss if there was this big "switch" as you say when did the Republican party ever adopt Jim Crow or segregationist planks in their party platform? It didn't happen, you lying sack of shit now did it. You can't provide any electoral history across the spectrum be it Congress, Senate, Govs, State Legislatures, and President because the Solid south after the 1960's didn't exist. Even your source says you are full of shit.

[clubgop]

No, it's not.

As with Holocust Denialism we will just have to agree to disagree.

You deny the Holocaust? I guess we do have to disagree.

Nooo, I oppose Holocust Denialism.

My grandmother and my uncle would come back from the dead and hit me upside my head.

Then why do you think you can get away with this? Why do you think you can causally call me racist and I am just supposed to shrug and take it? You provide no proof of fucking anything. You keep talking about dog whistles yet you are only one that can hear them but them other people they are the dogs. The only bitch here is you. Why do you think you can just call an observant Jew a fucking holocaust denier and expect to get away with it?

This is why people like you and GCF lose so goddamned always. You take no responsibility losing, its all sour grapes. "Thier racist, they deny the holocaust, they deny climate change, gerrymandering, voter ID, Russia, Russia, Russia, always some pitiful excuse for your own shortcomings.

[clubgop]

Do not fuck with jbird during finals week.

Yeah if he turns that weak shit he'll fail. No he'd be fine just regurgitate the useless leftist talking points of your liberal profressors complete with myths like the Solid south or "southern strategy."

[Okeefenokee]

Do not fuck with jbird during finals week.

That's three weeks away. Sheesh. I really should be studying. I'm so behind.

We have finals next week. Oh, and two exams this week. I hate when courses get behind schedule.

[clubgop]

There are some handy charts showing what Presidental was chosen by who Party in what state and when

You mean like these




Good thing the South is solid.



Never mind the lack of blue, affix your eyes on the south and its solidness.

You're a joke.

[heydaralon]

I'm not even sure what you guys are arguing about but I love reading these debate threads that get really heated.

[Okeefenokee]

I'm not even sure what you guys are arguing about but I love reading these debate threads that get really heated.

Liberals believe in a myth that their party, the party of slavery, the party of Jim Crow, the party of segregation, the party of police dogs attacking civil rights protesters in the streets of Alabama and Mississippi, switched sides with the Republicans one day and so now they are the party of good guys, and the Republicans took over their old positions.

It's a myth. It's been blown apart hundreds of times. There's no truth to it, but they NEED to believe it to sleep at night.

[Okeefenokee]

The solid South really was solidly Democratic from the end of Reconstruction through 1924. Democratic unity, however, began to exhibit cracks when the party nominated Al Smith for president in 1928. Smith, a Catholic, lost five out of eleven southern states. While anti-Catholic bigotry may have played a role in his disappointing returns, Smith won only one state outside the South. Southerners were in fact Smith’s biggest supporters.

In 1948, the South was again fractured with the Democratic incumbent Harry Truman winning seven southern states and losing four to the Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond. In late July of that year Truman had issued an executive order desegregating the armed forces and still he managed to win seven states and a supermajority of their electoral votes.

The solid South once again failed to live up to its name in the 1950s. In the first of two matchups between Dwight Eisenhower and the liberal Democrat Adlai Stevenson, the South was divided with Stevenson winning seven states and Eisenhower winning four. Four years later, Eisenhower fared slightly better in the South.

The 1960 election is problematic for the proponents of the Great Switch hypothesis because their darling John F. Kennedy was the candidate of the racist party — this being still four or eight years before the supposed switch took place. The electoral map that year was a patchwork — six southern states plus five faithless electors going to Kennedy, three states going to Nixon, and two states — Mississippi and Alabama — going to Virginia Senator Harry F. Byrd, who wasn’t actually a declared candidate.

In 1964 the South was again split, with six states going to Johnson (who was pretty racist, by the way) and five going to Barry Goldwater. Goldwater had voted against the Civil Rights Act though his party didn’t. Johnson, on the other hand, had a long history of segregationist sympathies and he belonged to the party that filibustered the bill, though he signed it into law.

Dixieland was once again divided in 1968 when one state voted for Humphrey, five for Nixon and five for the independent George Wallace, a former Democrat who would later return to his party.

If Nixon had courted racist southerners in 1968, he burned them by introducing minority hiring quotas in his first term. I don’t mean to imply that Nixon’s support for discriminatory hiring practices (against whites) is in any way laudable but it does seem an odd way to win the redneck vote. And yet the South voted overwhelmingly for Nixon in 1972 — just like the rest of America. That’s right, every southern state broke for the guy most responsible for minority hiring quotas.

Things got really weird in 1976 when the South was once again solid and blue. Four years after all eleven southern states voted for the Republican Nixon, ten switched back and voted for the Democrat Carter. As a southerner himself, Jimmy Carter knew how to talk to southern audiences but he was no conservative and certainly not a crypto-segregationist.

The South turned on Carter in 1980 much like the rest of America though his home state of Georgia stuck by him. Southern support for the Democrats would continue to plummet through the elections of 1984 and 1988 but would resurge again with the candidacy of another liberal southern governor, Bill Clinton.

The theory that the perpetually racist South suddenly changed party allegiance because of “civil rights” reforms is simply not supported by the facts. A more plausible explanation is that racial issues were never the sole driver, or even the primary driver, of southern voting trends. Southerners did begin to leave the party in the 1960s and 1970s, though mostly because the Democrats were well on their way to becoming the anti-Christian party, the job-killing party, and the blame-America-first party. But here’s another idea — is it possible that white southerners began to leave the Democratic Party because they found that the party had already rejected them? It’s a theory worth exploring.

http://libertyunyielding.com/2016/09/08 ... il-rights/

[heydaralon]

What is your opinion on the Southern Strategy?

[Okeefenokee]

What is your opinion on the Southern Strategy?

If you mean southern north America, it appears to have worked.