So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
Is that why George Wallace ran for President as a Rat in 1972? Lester Maddox, Robert Byrd, Al Gore's dad, Richard Russell, John Stennis, the list goes on and on, they all died as proud members of the Rat party.
true, it took someone like ronald reagan to truly unite all of the racists under one banner
Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan were Reagan supporters?
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
Is that why George Wallace ran for President as a Rat in 1972? Lester Maddox, Robert Byrd, Al Gore's dad, Richard Russell, John Stennis, the list goes on and on, they all died as proud members of the Rat party.
true, it took someone like ronald reagan to truly unite all of the racists under one banner
Translation: What I originally claimed was pure bullshit, I lack the integrity to admit as much so why don't I cover for that initial lie but telling another lie.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
Is that why George Wallace ran for President as a Rat in 1972? Lester Maddox, Robert Byrd, Al Gore's dad, Richard Russell, John Stennis, the list goes on and on, they all died as proud members of the Rat party.
true, it took someone like ronald reagan to truly unite all of the racists under one banner
Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan were Reagan supporters?
it's incredible how much of a caricature you are
it's like someone built a deplorable prototype and deployed it onto the internet
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
Yeah he really did. In the thread about Trump de-funding Planned Parenthood, Hondo claimed that that is was a move that would deny birth control to poor people. Put aside the fact that Hondo's claim is pure bullshit,
Why provide birth control options for the poor. So more people get pregnant. Resulting in more abortions. You guys should check into unintended consequences.
Why provide birth control options for the poor. So more people get pregnant. Resulting in more abortions. You guys should check into unintended consequences.
I’m so tired of this bullshit. How much is a 3 pack of Trojan condoms? Cost isn’t the reason poor people don’t use birth control. Poor people don’t use it, because they have spent a lifetime of making poor decision, which has become a way of life. So why not make another bad decision?
Hondo's response to Greenblood was:
How much does birth control cost? Awfully white male comment of you. I'm sorry you don't like facts.
Of course he now lies and claims he didn't say what he clearly did say. Skin color, in Hondo's mind has something to do with the ability to pay for birth control.
The difference is I was talking to a white male. Idiot.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
Yeah he really did. In the thread about Trump de-funding Planned Parenthood, Hondo claimed that that is was a move that would deny birth control to poor people. Put aside the fact that Hondo's claim is pure bullshit,
Why provide birth control options for the poor. So more people get pregnant. Resulting in more abortions. You guys should check into unintended consequences.
Why provide birth control options for the poor. So more people get pregnant. Resulting in more abortions. You guys should check into unintended consequences.
I’m so tired of this bullshit. How much is a 3 pack of Trojan condoms? Cost isn’t the reason poor people don’t use birth control. Poor people don’t use it, because they have spent a lifetime of making poor decision, which has become a way of life. So why not make another bad decision?
Hondo's response to Greenblood was:
How much does birth control cost? Awfully white male comment of you. I'm sorry you don't like facts.
Of course he now lies and claims he didn't say what he clearly did say. Skin color, in Hondo's mind has something to do with the ability to pay for birth control.
The difference is I was talking to a white male. Idiot.
What difference does that make? You think his skin color has something something to do with knowing how much or how little birth control costs. The fact that you were talking to a white guy is what allowed you to drop the mask.
Btw, I thought your lie was that you never said it?
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
Is that why George Wallace ran for President as a Rat in 1972? Lester Maddox, Robert Byrd, Al Gore's dad, Richard Russell, John Stennis, the list goes on and on, they all died as proud members of the Rat party.
true, it took someone like ronald reagan to truly unite all of the racists under one banner
Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan were Reagan supporters?
it's incredible how much of a caricature you are
it's like someone built a deplorable prototype and deployed it onto the internet
Incredible what a fucking lightweight you are. Seriously, the last thing this board needs is a fucking liberal who can't back up their mouth.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
I like to post links that don't refute a fucking word the other guy said. I also like to post links and not quote anything said in the link because as a lightweight Kunt I know this is the best method for me to use my Kunt act where I can say that I never "said" anything in the article I linked. That way I don't have to defend it.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
I like to post links that don't refute a fucking word the other guy said. I also like to post links and not quote anything said in the link because as a lightweight Kunt I know this is the best method for me to use my Kunt act where I can say that I never "said" anything in the article I linked. That way I don't have to defend it.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
I like to post links that don't refute a fucking word the other guy said. I also like to post links and not quote anything said in the link because as a lightweight Kunt I know this is the best method for me to use my Kunt act where I can say that I never "said" anything in the article I linked. That way I don't have to defend it.
That's what lightweight Kunts do.
You sound like a big fat old fat guy.
You sound like a guy that an ignore feature was created for.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
I like to post links that don't refute a fucking word the other guy said. I also like to post links and not quote anything said in the link because as a lightweight Kunt I know this is the best method for me to use my Kunt act where I can say that I never "said" anything in the article I linked. That way I don't have to defend it.
That's what lightweight Kunts do.
You sound like a big fat old fat guy.
You sound like a guy that an ignore feature was created for.
What are you going to about, you old fat fuck? Put me on ignore? 😂
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
I like to post links that don't refute a fucking word the other guy said. I also like to post links and not quote anything said in the link because as a lightweight Kunt I know this is the best method for me to use my Kunt act where I can say that I never "said" anything in the article I linked. That way I don't have to defend it.
That's what lightweight Kunts do.
You sound like a big fat old fat guy.
You sound like a 30 year old in mom's basement eating Hotpockets.
So the guy who just claimed that ability to pay for birth control is somehow tied to skin color is now trying to call someone else out for being a racist?
Did he really say that? It is so racist to think that way I can't believe he actually shared his true thoughts on the subject. It falls right in line with the lefts thinking that blacks are too stupid or lazy to get ID to vote.
If you let them talk long enough the ol' dem party racism comes out of all of them.
They are the historical racists but purchased votes with our tax dollars. Republicans freed the slaves at the cost of many thousands of white lives in the civil war. Odd the democrats gave their lives to continue slavery. Dem's gave them Jim Crow, the KKK, and segregation. I guess the question is which party gave more. Evidence would suggest the dems did by purchasing the votes. Keep those checks going out. Nothing else matters.
"When my guy says racist shit I point at the other guy for shit from 70 years ago" POTD
It probably says something that the segregationists immediately fled the Democratic party and joined the Republicans after 1964. I wonder what happened to cause that
The sound you're hearing is the idiot deplorables googling "what happened in 1964"
You are either ignorant or lying. Why don't you tell us.
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
The problem with the liberal narrative here isn't that they're wrong about a lot of Republicans being racist (they're not) it's that they're in complete denial about the racism within their own ranks.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Agreed, racism is wrong and I think the right does a pretty good job in policing their own. Duke was kicked out of the GOP, Sharpton was turned into an honored elder statesman and king maker in the Rat party.
I like to post links that don't refute a fucking word the other guy said. I also like to post links and not quote anything said in the link because as a lightweight Kunt I know this is the best method for me to use my Kunt act where I can say that I never "said" anything in the article I linked. That way I don't have to defend it.
That's what lightweight Kunts do.
You sound like a big fat old fat guy.
You sound like a 30 year old in mom's basement eating Hotpockets.
If we are going to bag on meatball or BBQ hot pockets then I'm out.
It's hard to think of a more bitchmade move on a message board than bragging about putting someone on ignore. Just do it and be done with it.
If there was or is an ignore feature I would. The guy isn't here for kind of honest exchange, he is here just be an ass and a troll. Hell Hondo is more substantive than he or your are.
Why waste my time with troll dumbfucks who aren't even interested in discussing any issues. It's not as if either of you Kunts are funny or interesting or insightful in any way.
It's hard to think of a more bitchmade move on a message board than bragging about putting someone on ignore. Just do it and be done with it.
If there was or is an ignore feature I would. The guy isn't here for kind of honest exchange, he is here just be an ass and a troll. Hell Hondo is more substantive than he or your are.
Why waste my time with troll dumbfucks who aren't even interested in discussing any issues. It's not as if either of you Kunts are funny or interesting or insightful in any way.
Lmfao I love that you've deluded yourself into thinking the deplorable circlejerk here is "discussing issues"
Comments
it's like someone built a deplorable prototype and deployed it onto the internet
holy shit you really couldn't make this stuff up
Educate yourself.
https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/featured/common-sense-central/content/2018-05-01-the-myth-of-the-republican-democrat-switch/
The Myth of the Republican-Democrat 'Switch'
In June of 1964, though, the bill came up again, and it passed...over the strenuous objections of Southern Democrats. 80% of House Republicans voted for the measure, compared with just 61% of Democrats, while 82% of Republicans in the Senate supported it, compared with 69% of Democrats.
Nearly all of the opposition was, naturally, in the South, which was still nearly unanimously Democratic and nearly unanimously resistant to the changing country. One thing that most assuredly didn't change, though, was party affiliation. A total of 21 Democrats in the Senate opposed the Civil Rights Act. Only one of them, "Dixiecrat" Strom Thurmond, ever became a Republican. The rest, including Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd--a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan--remained Democrats until the day they died.
Moreover, as those 20 lifelong Democrats retired, their Senate seats remained in Democrat hands for several decades afterwards. So too did the overwhelming majority of the House seats in the South until 1994, when a Republican wave election swept the GOP into control of the House for the first time since 1952. 1994 was also the first time Republicans ever held a majority of House seats in the South--a full 30 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
From there, Republicans gradually built their support in the South until two more wave elections in 2010 and 2014 gave them the overwhelming majorities they enjoy today.
If this was a sudden "switch" to the Republican Party for the old Democrat segregationists, it sure took a long time to happen.
The reality is that it didn't. After the 1964 election--the first after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the opportune time for racist Democrat voters to abandon the party in favor of Republicans--Democrats still held a 102-20 House majority in states that had once been part of the Confederacy. In 1960, remember, that advantage was 117-8. A pickup of 12 seats (half of them in Alabama) is hardly the massive shift one would expect if racist voters suddenly abandoned the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In fact, voting patterns in the South didn't really change all that much after the Civil Rights era. Democrats still dominated Senate, House, and gubernatorial elections for decades afterward. Alabama, for example, didn't elect a Republican governor until 1986. Mississippi didn't elect one until 1991. Georgia didn't elect one until 2002.
In the Senate, Republicans picked up four southern Senate seats in the 1960s and 1970s, while Democrats also picked up four. Democratic incumbents won routinely. If anything, those racist southern voters kept voting Democrat.
Until they're willing to own, acknowledge and deal with that their screams at the right are going to continue to be ineffective and dishonest.
The right needs to deal with that shit in their own ranks because racism is wrong, but not because the left has any moral superiority on the subject.
Btw, I thought your lie was that you never said it?
That's what lightweight Kunts do.
Why waste my time with troll dumbfucks who aren't even interested in discussing any issues. It's not as if either of you Kunts are funny or interesting or insightful in any way.