Hilarious. Let me guess, the Southern Strategy was a fiction created by the liberal media to besmirch the good name of upstanding Republicans.
Cain this all be true?
- Thread starter icedancer2theend
- Start date
Hilarious. Let me guess, the Southern Strategy was a fiction created by the liberal media to besmirch the good name of upstanding Republicans.
Alias
Banned
It is a myth. You believe the NY Times? I was there. Where were you?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html
Instead of grabbing the left wing political view, educate yourself on a historical, scholars view supported by voting data, etc.....
The Myth of ‘the Southern Strategy’
By CLAY RISEN
Published: December 10, 2006
Everyone knows that race has long played a decisive role in Southern electoral politics. From the end of Reconstruction until the beginning of the civil rights era, the story goes, the national Democratic Party made room for segregationist members — and as a result dominated the South. But in the 50s and 60s, Democrats embraced the civil rights movement, costing them the white Southern vote. Meanwhile, the Republican Party successfully wooed disaffected white racists with a “Southern strategy” that championed “states’ rights.”
It’s an easy story to believe, but this year two political scientists called it into question. In their book “The End of Southern Exceptionalism,” Richard Johnston of the University of Pennsylvania and Byron Shafer of the University of Wisconsin argue that the shift in the South from Democratic to Republican was overwhelmingly a question not of race but of economic growth. In the postwar era, they note, the South transformed itself from a backward region to an engine of the national economy, giving rise to a sizable new wealthy suburban class. This class, not surprisingly, began to vote for the party that best represented its economic interests: the G.O.P. Working-class whites, however — and here’s the surprise — even those in areas with large black populations, stayed loyal to the Democrats. (This was true until the 90s, when the nation as a whole turned rightward in Congressional voting.)
The two scholars support their claim with an extensive survey of election returns and voter surveys. To give just one example: in the 50s, among Southerners in the low-income tercile, 43 percent voted for Republican Presidential candidates, while in the high-income tercile, 53 percent voted Republican; by the 80s, those figures were 51 percent and 77 percent, respectively. Wealthy Southerners shifted rightward in droves but poorer ones didn’t.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html
The Myth of ‘the Southern Strategy’
By CLAY RISEN
Published: December 10, 2006
Everyone knows that race has long played a decisive role in Southern electoral politics. From the end of Reconstruction until the beginning of the civil rights era, the story goes, the national Democratic Party made room for segregationist members — and as a result dominated the South. But in the 50s and 60s, Democrats embraced the civil rights movement, costing them the white Southern vote. Meanwhile, the Republican Party successfully wooed disaffected white racists with a “Southern strategy” that championed “states’ rights.”
It’s an easy story to believe, but this year two political scientists called it into question. In their book “The End of Southern Exceptionalism,” Richard Johnston of the University of Pennsylvania and Byron Shafer of the University of Wisconsin argue that the shift in the South from Democratic to Republican was overwhelmingly a question not of race but of economic growth. In the postwar era, they note, the South transformed itself from a backward region to an engine of the national economy, giving rise to a sizable new wealthy suburban class. This class, not surprisingly, began to vote for the party that best represented its economic interests: the G.O.P. Working-class whites, however — and here’s the surprise — even those in areas with large black populations, stayed loyal to the Democrats. (This was true until the 90s, when the nation as a whole turned rightward in Congressional voting.)
The two scholars support their claim with an extensive survey of election returns and voter surveys. To give just one example: in the 50s, among Southerners in the low-income tercile, 43 percent voted for Republican Presidential candidates, while in the high-income tercile, 53 percent voted Republican; by the 80s, those figures were 51 percent and 77 percent, respectively. Wealthy Southerners shifted rightward in droves but poorer ones didn’t.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2b.t-4.html
poet
Banned
For the umpteenth time:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_did_...me_democrats_and_democrats_became_republicans
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Well we both know that whatever bill comes out of congress will ultimately protect the segment of our society who can't afford to pay taxes, does that need to be stipulated by Cain, are you that much of a moron that you don't understand this is what will happen? I mean, really... you think Congress would ever force low-income or elderly people to pay a tax they aren't currently paying, for food and shelter? So a provision has to be made for these people, we already understand that, because we are all reasonable people... except you, you're an idiot.
Cain is structuring his plan based on the Fair Tax plan, which includes a prebate check to everyone, for basic necessities and needs. I assume his plan will have similar provisions, if it doesn't, those will surely be demanded by most of Congress, because most people will agree we need to make such provisions. But in your world, Republicans are all evil and want to punish the poor and kick the elderly off the cliff.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I didn't re-quote the remainder of your post, because quite frankly, it made me nauseous. I disagree that most people are racist, I think very FEW people are. I believe we are ALL prejudice to some degree. I think that was what you meant, but words have specific meaning. Racist, means you believe a certain pigmentation is superior or inferior to another. Do you believe this? I don't believe this, and I don't know very many people who do, and I live in an area where you'd expect to find that sentiment quite prevalent. That's not to say there aren't racist people everywhere, and most of them are smart enough to keep it to themselves. But, as a society, I believe America has changed, just in the past few generations, our kids and grandkids have grown up with multi-ethnic friends, it's just not the same world as it was in the 1960s, for blacks or any minority.
Lowaicue
英語在香港
Allow me to respond. Firstly it is in the nature of man to look for patterns. It is how we understand the world. Mathmaticians spend years searching for prime numbers, we recognise each other by pattern and pattern variance so there is no offence to be had in my statement.
Secondly, although you may equate race and colour, not everyone does. America is NOT representative of the world in general. There are many human attributes that supply us with reasons for prejudice (pre judging) or making sense of our fellow man. Their is height, for example, shape, behaviour, culture and colour. BUT you should realise that when you, as an American, use the word 'black', not only does it not mean the same to everyone outside America it does not even identify a single race.
So please, rather than jump onto the right white bandwagon, try to understand that nothing in my post showed me to be racist or any other 'ist' nor less human, less intelligent, less acceptable than you.
We have our differences but I do not think this is one of them.
The traditional racial divisions (which are not accepted by everyone) are: Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Australoid, Negroid and Capoid.The problem for those who bounce the word 'racist' around is that as far as genetic materials are concerned, all those races share more than 99.99 %. So the word is almost always used subjectively and without a true understanding. Certainly if you call me a white bastard I will label you or if you call me a black bastard or a yellow bastard or whatever.
The fact remains that in our efforts to understand ourselves, each other and the world around us we constantly search for recognisable patterns and colour is just one aspect of that.
Its really all about how you treat people and how you respect people.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Now you are just being totally ridiculous.
poet
Banned
Originally Posted by Aoxomoxoa
I've spoken my mind in this very forum and I have been called everything but a child of God. Alias solicited to murder me. How is that different, tangibly, from Nazi Germany?
"Evil regime", may be stretching it "a bit", but at times, it seems to fit this place to a "tee".
Right. And you have the nerve to label someone else "a troll".
We are discussing Cain's plan. You said he included prebates for the poor. He doesn't. Cain's plan has no provision for prebates and would hit the poor and the elderly very hard.
This is why I asked for citations from you.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Again, presidents never get to implement exactly what they propose. It doesn't work that way, and you should know this. Whatever is passed, has to be approved by Congress, and they aren't going to force low income families and the elderly to pay a tax they aren't currently paying. Cain doesn't include it because we are all smart enough to know it will be included. I'm smart enough to know that, and I am a devout conservative, so I know a vociferous liberal such as yourself, can figure it out. Cain is not presenting a bill, he is talking about a tax reform plan. You claim his plan would "hit the poor and elderly very hard" but what does that mean? A 9% sales tax is not that much, 9 cents on the dollar... I mean, is that your definition of "hit hard" these days? Even if there were no provision made for the poor and elderly, which we ALL KNOW WILL BE THE CASE, it still doesn't equate to a "hard hit" by any stretch. In any event, we can let the people make up their minds on this, if the elderly and poor want to continue to put their trust and faith in democrats who seem intent on bankrupting the country, then so be it.
Alias
Banned
Wikipedia is not a scholarly site. Even the founder and most college professors will not accept papers with Wiki listed as the primary source. Dumb ass Colored Negro.
Lowaicue
英語在香港
You are absolutely right. Wikipedia is not a scholarly site. I have criricised its use many times. However you have the opportunity to put right what you consider wrong. May I suggest you do that and then perhaps the discussion might progress.
poet
Banned
Baby boom. That girl doesn't know anything. Anything she might put there would need to be double checked and cross-referenced, for accuracy.
Alias
Banned
Cain's plan is Cain's plan. He's responsible for what is in it and what isn't in it. What he is proposing has no prebates, contrary to your claims otherwise, and would indeed hit the poor and the elderly very hard.
The prebates hit at the second phase when, supposedly, the fair tax is implemented.
I'm not defending the plan. I think it is naive and foolish to give the Federal government another revenue stream while leaving any form of the old one in place. I also think that any form of sales tax would only make for a more complicated tax code in order to make it "progressive".
Basically I see it going like this (if it ever passed, which I doubt):
1. The sales tax would have some sort of prebate or means-tested card that allowed the "poor" to not pay the tax.
2. The 9% income tax would be more like 20% and would involve some form of increased rates for "rich" people.
3. The congress would pass laws along the way that would increase the "progressive" nature of the tax code. More people would get the tax cards (to get them out of paying) and some businesses (think health care, etc) would get them and it would all start again with a new stream of revenue that will never go away...
I don't like this plan.
icedancer2theend
Verified User
“I'm just saying, you get this bull's-eye on your back,” Cain said.
Cain has also given more detailed rebuttals to the charge that his plan would give Democrats an opening to raise taxes, suggesting that critics were using tired assumptions about his proposals. The candidate also says that, as part of implementing 9-9-9, he would ask lawmakers to require a two-thirds vote to make changes to the plan.
And Cain adds that, as a fiscal conservative, the government won’t need influxes of revenue with him in the Oval Office.
“As president, I am going to be working to bring down the debt,” Cain said on “Fox News Sunday” this month. “So, we're not going to have that tendency to continue to raise it because spending is out of control the way it is now. We will get spending under control at the same time that we grow this economy.”
As it stands, the 9-9-9 plan scraps a host of taxes already on the books – including levies on dividends and capital gains, the estate tax and the payroll tax, which funds Social Security.
On his website, the Cain campaign also says the candidate would like to eventually put the Fair Tax into place in the U.S., which would completely eliminate the corporate and individual income taxes and implement a much broader national sales tax.
more
Cain has also given more detailed rebuttals to the charge that his plan would give Democrats an opening to raise taxes, suggesting that critics were using tired assumptions about his proposals. The candidate also says that, as part of implementing 9-9-9, he would ask lawmakers to require a two-thirds vote to make changes to the plan.
And Cain adds that, as a fiscal conservative, the government won’t need influxes of revenue with him in the Oval Office.
“As president, I am going to be working to bring down the debt,” Cain said on “Fox News Sunday” this month. “So, we're not going to have that tendency to continue to raise it because spending is out of control the way it is now. We will get spending under control at the same time that we grow this economy.”
As it stands, the 9-9-9 plan scraps a host of taxes already on the books – including levies on dividends and capital gains, the estate tax and the payroll tax, which funds Social Security.
On his website, the Cain campaign also says the candidate would like to eventually put the Fair Tax into place in the U.S., which would completely eliminate the corporate and individual income taxes and implement a much broader national sales tax.
more