quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
When all you know about history is a list of dates you know absolutely nothing about history.

Biggest single failure of the American educational system.

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:
Republicans still clinging to a false version of history as if the big Southern flip never occurred at all.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
When all you know about history is a list of dates you know absolutely nothing about history.

Biggest single failure of the American educational system.

Maybe -- but i do hold a degree in history

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:
Republicans still clinging to a false version of history as if the big Southern flip never occurred at all.

The topic isn't the southern flip - the topic is party swap - the party swap premise is that the dems and reps swapped positions on platforms -

In review of POTUS elections, the "Solid South" didn't strongly vote for republicans(since reconstruction) until Reagan

But as an acid test, It's more likely that Texas and Cali voted for the same candidate until 1992, but half of the "solid south" still voted Dem until 2000

Interesting side note - Trent Lott, 1988, was the first Republican Senator for Mississippi since reconstruction, while, at the same time, John Stennis was the last Dem Senator from Miss at the same time.

Now, Southern Flip seems to coincide with Reagan/Bush era - But ROUGHLY the South is a near even split in Rep/Dems -- Here's a REALLY weird side note - Did you know Trump received MORE rep votes in Cali than he did in Texas, in the 2020 election?

Has the seat of the population voting Dem/Rep moved around since, say, 1860? Sure has -- Cali and NY used to be solid Republican states back then -- but they "flipped"

Have the Parties swapped party positions, say 51% or greater? Nah bro

but has party FOCUS changed? Sure, I can get behind that

Have they (as in BOTH) become more/less conservative/liberal - Yep -- I can back that too

here's an interesting wiki article that I think needs further study
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...stem#Further_reading

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

That degree from Trump University?

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
All you have to do is look at the written Platforms to see the swap.

The Texas GOP in its written platform seeks to end the Equal Protection Amendments, and Civil Rights Act. You are not going to find that in any state Dem written platform.

quote:

Properly defining public accommodation as understood in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that we:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The Southern Strategy is well documented if you want a name of a prominent Democrat in the South that switched Parties as the Parties realigned:

Sen. Storm Thurmond. He switched from Democrat to Republican in 1964. He filibustered the Civil Rights Act in 1957. He also voted against it in 1964. Thurmond switch was due to Goldwater refusing to support the Civil Rights Act. Goldwater ran for President in 1964.

Goldwater, the most prominent Senate Republican along with his buddy Thurmond made 2 Senate Republican who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.


Some peer reviewed reading.

https://academic.oup.com/book/...irectedFrom=fulltext

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Well, it takes creativity to deny the Southern Strategy. I'm sure you will manage.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Josh,
you do get that

quote:

Properly defining public accommodation as understood in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that we:

is "reference to authority" with the CRA being the authority, right? aka, in support of!

It does NOT call for removal of the CRA -- read it critically -- or, conversely, read it as if dems wrote it --


I am right there with you on health care confidentially, and i'll raise you that abortion should be legal, at least until the 16th week, nationally

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Well, it takes creativity to deny the Southern Strategy. I'm sure you will manage.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Josh,
you do get that

quote:

Properly defining public accommodation as understood in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that we:

is "reference to authority" with the CRA being the authority, right? aka, in support of!

It does NOT call for removal of the CRA -- read it critically -- or, conversely, read it as if dems wrote it --


I am right there with you on health care confidentially, and i'll raise you that abortion should be legal, at least until the 16th week, nationally

The problem becomes letting the State of Texas controlled by the GOP so define those limitations when it seeks the withdrawal of the application of the Commerce Clause that upheld the Civil Rights Act. See Justice Thomas’ dissent in that case.

I can post the Commerce Clause Case that upheld the Civil Rights Act constitutionally with the dissent, if you would like to read it? Not being a jerk. Legitimately offering.