Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Southern Whites' Shift to the GOP Predates the '60s
Real Clear Politics ^ | April 30, 2013 | Sean Trende

Posted on 05/01/2013 6:32:43 PM PDT by neverdem

I by-and-large agree with the thrust of Jamelle Bouie’s recent American Prospect article, which argues that Republicans badly misapprehend the reason(s) African-Americans generally vote for Democratic candidates. Too many conservatives assert that African-Americans have developed a “false consciousness” and simply need to be shown the error of their ways before they’ll start supporting Republicans. Asking “What’s the matter with black people?” simply isn’t going to get the GOP very far in its minority outreach efforts.

But in the course of this argument, Bouie makes the following statement: “White Southerners jumped ship from Democratic presidential candidates in the 1960s, and this was followed by a similar shift on the congressional level, and eventually, the state legislative level. That the [last] two took time doesn’t discount the first.”

If you polled pundits, you’d probably get 90 percent agreement with this statement. And if you polled political scientists, you’d likely get a majority to sign off on it. That’s maddening, because it’s incorrect.

I’ve written at length on this, both in my book and here, but it is worth revisiting. In truth, the white South began breaking away from the Democrats in the 1920s, as population centers began to develop in what was being called the “New South” (remember, at the beginning of the 20th century, New Orleans was the only thing approximating what we currently think of as a city in the South).

In the 1930s and 1940s, FDR performed worse in the South in every election following his 1932 election. By the mid-1940s, the GOP was winning about a quarter of the Southern vote in presidential elections...

(Excerpt) Read more at dyn.realclearpolitics.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: conservatives; dixie; fdr; realignment; trends
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

1 posted on 05/01/2013 6:32:43 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Southern Democrats are still around, like Dickhead Harpoon Liam. My guess is he still has his Klan outfit.


2 posted on 05/01/2013 6:38:18 PM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Some of us have actually been Republicans since there were any. During the Civil War, much of Southern Appalachia actually sympathized with the Union. After the war, many were Republicans, although they had little effect on the course of things.


3 posted on 05/01/2013 6:41:54 PM PDT by GenXteacher (You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Born in the late 50s. We had crosses burning at the end of our streets because we sympathized with the blacks during the 60’s. Gotta love those loving Democrats! It scared the hell out of me as a small child! Yes, I’m Caucasian!


4 posted on 05/01/2013 7:03:33 PM PDT by poobear (Socialism in the minds of the elites, is a con-game for the serfs, nothing more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: poobear
Yes, I’m Caucasian!

So, what part of the Caucasus are you from?

5 posted on 05/01/2013 7:08:46 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (HEY RATS! Control your murdering freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I am 65 and have never voted for a Democrat for state or national office. My first vote for President was for Richard Nixon. And I would vote for him again in a heartbeat.

My first political exposure was from a high school history/government teacher. We watched the 1964 elections and discussed the candidates, process and parties. He was a Republican. There were very very few Republicans in Texas at that time.

BUT bear in mind, the Dems in TX were far more fiscally and socially conservative than 80% of the Current GOP. FACT.

Yes the shift began in the early 1960’s.


6 posted on 05/01/2013 7:17:12 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GenXteacher

Yeah, but pretty much all of those Appalachian Republicans became Democrats during Reconstruction. Having your property looted will do that to you.


7 posted on 05/01/2013 7:20:39 PM PDT by SeeSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

My understanding was that Ann Coulter developed this at length in her book about racial conning.


8 posted on 05/01/2013 7:35:57 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
This whole article gives the subtle notion that racists/bigots joined the Republicans before the sixties, and then states during Goldwater's run, "and there’s no doubt, at least in my mind, that GOP candidates used racialized appeals to try to win over Southern whites." Frankly, I don't care what's in this writers mind; there is no proof or facts here that racists/bigots did join. Changing parties could well have meant that there were some who just grew up, just like I grew up and quit being a Democrat and became a Conservative who votes Republican. Though some Blue-Blood Northeastern Republicans try to be like the Slaver Party Democrats, the Republican Party still has as one of it's cores the Conservative base, the Democrats have no such core! The only Party who has wholeheartedly has and is the Party of Slavers is the Democratic Party.
9 posted on 05/01/2013 7:41:51 PM PDT by celmak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FReepers; Patriots; FRiends








God Bless and Keep RG3!!

Please Support Free Republic Today/Tonight!
Please Consider Donating Monthly.
Generous FReeper Sponsors are donating $10 for every New Monthly Donor & $1-A-DAY DONOR!


10 posted on 05/01/2013 7:43:41 PM PDT by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
From the article: "In the 1930s and 1940s, FDR performed worse in the South in every election following his 1932 election."

Lol..the South supported FDR's unprecedented third term in 1940 in numbers that exceeded 80%.

That was "worse" than the greater than 90% support the region gave FDR in his 1932 campaign against Hoover, only if you're a slippery sophist or a statistician.

The simple fact was no section of America was a stronger supporter of the entire progressive New Deal expansion of government from 1932 - 1944 than the South.

See Atlas of Presidential Results

11 posted on 05/01/2013 8:07:25 PM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
I think his contention is that the shift "started" with FDR. It took another couple of decades for the shift to reach critical mass.

As another poster notes, Texas went through the same shift. Republicans didn't start winning elections until the 60's. But, that doesn't mean there were no Republicans in Texas before then.

12 posted on 05/01/2013 8:25:48 PM PDT by justlurking (tagline removed, as demanded by Admin Moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Epsdude

Ping!


13 posted on 05/01/2013 8:32:15 PM PDT by DustyMoment (Congress - another name for anti-American criminals!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justlurking
I think his contention is that the shift "started" with FDR.

Well he's wrong, there was no shift toward the GOP by the South in the 1930s or 1940s. FDR got Hugo Chavez like numbers there every election. When things finally did shift away from the Democrats in the South, it wasn't toward the GOP it was towards third parties.

14 posted on 05/01/2013 9:41:28 PM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: celmak

I sure didn’t see that, do you have some quotes?

To me this is the author revealing the opposite, Republicans were making gains because of their civil rights efforts.

“”But the big breakthrough, to the extent that there was one, came in 1952. Dwight Eisenhower won 48 percent of the vote there, compared to Adlai Stevenson’s 52 percent. He carried most of the “peripheral South” — Virginia, Tennessee, Texas and Florida — and made inroads in the “Deep South,” almost carrying South Carolina and losing North Carolina and Louisiana by single digits.

Even in what we might call the “Deepest South” — Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi — Eisenhower kept Stevenson under 70 percent, which might not seem like much until you realize that Tom Dewey got 18 percent in Georgia against FDR in 1944, and that this had been an improvement over Herbert Hoover’s 8 percent in 1932.

In 1956, Eisenhower became the first Republican since Reconstruction to win a plurality of the vote in the South, 49.8 percent to 48.9 percent. He once again carried the peripheral South, but also took Louisiana with 53 percent of the vote. He won nearly 40 percent of the vote in Alabama. This is all the more jarring when you realize that the Brown v. Board decision was handed down in the interim, that the administration had appointed the chief justice who wrote the decision, and that the administration had opposed the school board.

Nor can we simply write this off to Eisenhower’s celebrity. The GOP was slowly improving its showings at the congressional level as well. It won a special election to a House seat in west Texas in 1950, and began winning urban congressional districts in Texas, North Carolina, Florida and Virginia with regularity beginning in 1952.””


15 posted on 05/01/2013 9:51:17 PM PDT by ansel12 (Civilization, Crusade against the Mohammedan Death Cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

John Tower is one who turned to the left but he was a real conservative from 1961 to 1965; then he moved left slowly at first, then embraced abortion and opposed SDI.


16 posted on 05/01/2013 9:53:16 PM PDT by Theodore R. ("Hey, the American people must all be crazy out there!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

This is what he wrote.

“”In the 1930s and 1940s, FDR performed worse in the South in every election following his 1932 election. By the mid-1940s, the GOP was winning about a quarter of the Southern vote in presidential elections.

But the big breakthrough, to the extent that there was one, came in 1952. Dwight Eisenhower won 48 percent of the vote there, compared to Adlai Stevenson’s 52 percent. He carried most of the “peripheral South” — Virginia, Tennessee, Texas and Florida — and made inroads in the “Deep South,” almost carrying South Carolina and losing North Carolina and Louisiana by single digits.

Even in what we might call the “Deepest South” — Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi — Eisenhower kept Stevenson under 70 percent, which might not seem like much until you realize that Tom Dewey got 18 percent in Georgia against FDR in 1944, and that this had been an improvement over Herbert Hoover’s 8 percent in 1932.

In 1956, Eisenhower became the first Republican since Reconstruction to win a plurality of the vote in the South,””


17 posted on 05/01/2013 9:59:01 PM PDT by ansel12 (Civilization, Crusade against the Mohammedan Death Cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
Because of the Chechens, it's no longer safe for me to say I'm Caucasian.

Now I just say I'm a Honkey or a Cracker...

18 posted on 05/01/2013 10:04:08 PM PDT by Cowboy Bob (Democrats: Robbing Peter to buy Paul's vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

Yes, I remember Tower. Think I have a book written by him in my library.

He was from Wichita Falls. That is 90 miles from where I live.


19 posted on 05/01/2013 11:13:53 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

My great grandfather soured on FDR when he saw cattle killed to reduce herds without preserving the meat for consumption. Farmers were paid to kill the livestock and bury it.

The 3rd term was the final blow for him, according to my father.


20 posted on 05/01/2013 11:18:55 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
My great grandfather soured on FDR when he saw cattle killed to reduce herds without preserving the meat for consumption. Farmers were paid to kill the livestock and bury it.

It was done to RAISE prices..... during a DEPRESSION! Talk about not being the sharpest tack in the wall.

21 posted on 05/01/2013 11:21:50 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Yep, they called it “price stabilization”.

Pure crap, when there were many hungry people. Total nonsense. Egghead Nonsense.


22 posted on 05/01/2013 11:23:09 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

This is where Ayn Rand probably got some of her ideas


23 posted on 05/01/2013 11:24:59 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Some of my ancestors were literally burned out of AL during Reconstruction for resisting that oppression. 2 paid with their lives.

The rest went GTT, like many others.

Other of my ancestors were already in TX. One was born in TX during the Republic.

You never erase memories like those. Not since that time have we had such a totally corrupt and dishonest Federal Government.

I bristle every time I think about the similarities. Sobering.


24 posted on 05/01/2013 11:27:28 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Culling the Herds

http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe30s/crops_17.html


25 posted on 05/01/2013 11:29:04 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

I am amazed anyone but the toughest would come here before the invention of air conditioning. Then I remembered we didn’t have an AC before I was about 14.

We did have an ornery swamp cooler though


26 posted on 05/01/2013 11:30:29 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Ayn Rand was visionary, but I am left cold by some of her ideas.

My favorite of her books is:

“Capitalism the Untried Ideal”


27 posted on 05/01/2013 11:32:11 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

I meant that her depiction of the bad guys was dead on accurate. I didn’t like her good guys much more though.


28 posted on 05/01/2013 11:34:14 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Yes, the Rolling Plains in particular is a harsh environment.

My great grandfather came here in 1889 from Coryell County. Some of the family went back to near Gatesville for 3 years beginning in 1895 because of a terrible drought, like today. They moved back in 1898. We have owned/farmed land here ever since.

I left for 25 years, moved back in 1995. But continued to travel for a living until about 2003.

We have not had cattle for 2 years. Cost of cotton production drove us out of that. We grow, store, clean, and treat wheat for seed. Made 1/2 a crop last season, this one looks very questionable. Double whammy this year, extreme dry winter and 2 late freezes. One of the local crop insurance agents told me the thought only 10% of the planted wheat crops would be harvested.


29 posted on 05/01/2013 11:41:44 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Yes, she knew the enemies. Absolutely.

She understood how destructive they really are too.


30 posted on 05/01/2013 11:43:21 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Have enjoyed the visit tonight, but I have a doctors appointment in Abilene tomorrow. Must shut this thing down for now.


31 posted on 05/01/2013 11:44:53 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil

I should but I might end up sleeping till noon if I don’t....


32 posted on 05/01/2013 11:49:29 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

The Northeast and Midwest states were FDR’s weakest areas of support. A good example is Massachusetts where FDR never broke over 53% of the vote. It was the Southern and Western states that gave him huge majorities.


33 posted on 05/01/2013 11:59:59 PM PDT by princeofdarkness (The GOP is the present version of 1940 France and it will only get worse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

I’m referring to the light skin definition of Caucasian smart pants. Yes I held back @sshat!


34 posted on 05/02/2013 12:23:58 AM PDT by poobear (Socialism in the minds of the elites, is a con-game for the serfs, nothing more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I reviewed some of the posts and it got me to thinking about
the flip side. On the surface in the post Civil War (apologies
to Southern folks offended by the term) era, the GOP was
associated with the North while the Democrat Party was
more closely associated w/ the South. How did the Dems
gain prominence in the North? What caused Teddy’s cousin
FDR to be a Dem? By the the 1950s & 60s the term ‘Dixiecrat’
referring to Southern Democrats came in to vogue as if they
were a minority within the Dem party. What about that?


35 posted on 05/02/2013 12:34:44 AM PDT by Sivad (NorCal red turf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
The 3rd term was the final blow for him, according to my father.

Had Roosevelt not run for a third term the likely Democratic nominee would have been Vice President John Nance of Texas, who was no fan the New Deal.

36 posted on 05/02/2013 4:49:26 AM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Huey Long.


37 posted on 05/02/2013 4:54:49 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: poobear
Yes I held back @sshat!

No you didn't, did I call you a filthy name or something?

38 posted on 05/02/2013 5:08:31 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate: Republicans Freed the Slaves Month)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
"I sure didn’t see that, do you have some quotes?

OK, I will AGAIN put the explicitly racists quote from the article I used : "and there’s no doubt, at least in my mind, that GOP candidates used racialized appeals to try to win over Southern whites."

To iterate, the Democrats have been, and still are, the Party of Slavers. This story gives the excuse, sublimely and explicitly, that the Republicans are the Party of racists; and that is not true!

39 posted on 05/02/2013 5:42:30 AM PDT by celmak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob
I'm a Honkey or a Cracker...

A "cracker" cracked whips on the slaves.

I'm a Mercan.

40 posted on 05/02/2013 6:08:36 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate: Republicans Freed the Slaves Month)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: celmak

Read the article and put that in context of the entire article.

“Goldwater’s nomination may well have represented a watershed in the GOP’s ideological development (though I think there are some nuances there that are frequently missed as well), and there’s no doubt, at least in my mind, that GOP candidates used racialized appeals to try to win over Southern whites. None of those debates are impacted by the observations above.

But the assertion that white Southerners began voting Republican in 1964 is simply incorrect, whether for president, Congress, or statehouses. The development of the Southern GOP was a slow-moving, gradual process that lasted over a century, and is just being completed today.”


41 posted on 05/02/2013 12:26:40 PM PDT by ansel12 (Civilization, Crusade against the Mohammedan Death Cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

You have to tell us what your post is about.


42 posted on 05/02/2013 12:28:54 PM PDT by ansel12 (Civilization, Crusade against the Mohammedan Death Cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

My post was about the impression some have attempted to put forth that the Southern Democrats were somehow “conservative”.

Huey Long put the lie to that assertion.

Huey Long was a Louisiana Governor and U.S. Senator from Louisiana.

He was best known for the “Share Our Wealth” program he advocated, a tax on assets (not income) that would put the government in charge of “redistributing” wealth.

The Democrats (southern or otherwise) were big time big government socialists for a long long time.


43 posted on 05/02/2013 12:33:23 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

I know who Huey Long was, but you are wrong if you don’t know how naturally conservative the South is, it is why the democrats couldn’t hold onto it as issues became more defined as left and right, and why it is so staunchly right wing today.


44 posted on 05/02/2013 1:12:50 PM PDT by ansel12 (Civilization, Crusade against the Mohammedan Death Cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Huey Long was a conservative? You think Huey Long was an exception? He was very much a product of his time and place, a Southern Democrat through and through.


45 posted on 05/02/2013 1:15:25 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

What an idiotic post.

Why would you make up such a silly fake post when my actual post is just above your fantasy creation.


46 posted on 05/02/2013 1:29:25 PM PDT by ansel12 (Civilization, Crusade against the Mohammedan Death Cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Hey, no need to be rude.

Huey Long was a Southern Democrat. He was not a conservative. He was not that far removed from the rest of the party, Southern or not.

Texas at that time was electing Governors who went on to be FDR appointed Judges, and who tried to limit cotton growing and oil production via government mandate.

The Democrats have been big government socialists for a long time, Southern or not.

Sorry if the truth gets your dander up.

My apologies for telling you truth you don’t want to hear.


47 posted on 05/02/2013 1:31:59 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

I don’t care about Huey Long.

Anybody who would create that lie of post 45 is not interested in any truth or honesty.

Bother someone else with whatever you want to tell the world about the one time governor of Louisiana.


48 posted on 05/02/2013 1:40:59 PM PDT by ansel12 (Civilization, Crusade against the Mohammedan Death Cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

No, I imagine you wouldn’t care much about Huey Long if you were trying to sell the snake oil that Southern Democrats were conservative.

‘Conservative’, if you can call it that, about keeping Blacks from voting in Democrat primaries.

Not so conservative about not being big spending big government proponents of the FDR’s “New Deal”.


49 posted on 05/02/2013 1:44:38 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Concurring bump.

The depression hit the South hard and public works kept a lot of folks there from starving. By the end of his second term though, FDR's progressive agenda was clearly backfiring but Southern voters kept on supporting it.

Interestingly, Long was said to have been considering a run for President himself in 1936, before getting shot by the son of a rival.

50 posted on 05/02/2013 3:08:44 PM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson