I was doing some research on the history of the civil rights movement and how it was Republicans that supported it and Democrats who, in large part, fought it. This video seems to claim the reason the Democrats became the "civil rights" party is because of Goldwater. I'm quite interested in what you guys think...
YouTube - Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964
No. The Democrats are stealing from the productive to give to the "special interest groups" -- IE; minorities. Who wouldn't vote for the party that is going to give them all sorts of freebies?
The Religious Right also had a huge impact. Legislating morality and all that jazz.
blacks were nearly 100% Republican from Lincoln to Hoover; the change came with FDR and especially Eleanor.
True, but even through the 50s the Republican party had strong black support. Democrats fought against the 1957 Civil Rights Act (voting rights). JFK voted against it and so did Al Gore Sr. and many other Democrats. Strom Thurmond was a Democrat then and he did a one-man filibuster for more than 24 hours to prevent it from passing. As we know Democrat and former Klansman Robert Byrd filibustered the '64 Act.Quote:
Originally Posted by cindy25
Democrats are masters at the art of political smears. Thanks to our deplorable state of education, people have no understanding of the Constitution or our heritage of freedom.
This is a great reason for abandoning the Republican Party and create a new third party.
No it isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by MN Patriot
Why?Quote:
Originally Posted by angelatc
The Republicans have been smeared as racists for almost 50 years now. If the Tea Party movement were to start a third party, emphasizing that freedom is color blind, we could avoid the road blocks of trying to take over the Republican Party.
True, but the video shows blacks burying "Republican" coffins presumably to symbolize the death of the Republican party's support of civil rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Austrian Econ Disciple
You may be right about the religious right, but that was after the tide started to change, no?
Does anyone have a list of how senators and congressmen voted for the '64 act and their party affiliation? A list of how everyone voted for the '57 act would be interesting too.
:)
AT 2:40 THE "Negroes for Goldwater" campaign headquarters sign.
No. Republicans lost the majority of minority support for the first time in 1960, when the Democrats adopted an extremely pro-black Party Platform for the first time. MLK was arrested shortly before the election, and JFK's more liberal handlers tricked him in to giving MLK's wife a courtesy call. MLK was released almost immediately after (for completely unrelated reasons) and those forces within JFK's team used the incident for great propaganda effect in black northern churches. JFK was privately pissed about the whole thing because he was terrified of losing the South (that's the whole reason he put LBJ, whom he despised, on the ticket in the first place). 1964 just sealed the deal. It should be noted that Nixon adopted a "Southern Strategy" for pure political reason. He had no principled position on Civil Rights (or any domestic issue for that matter). Goldwater was personally opposed to racism and took the position he did on the Civil Rights Act because he knew it was the right thing to do, not because he thought it would win him votes in the South. He went out of his way not to talk about his positions on Civil Rights in the South in fact, just to hammer home the point he didn't agree with their segregationist politicians.
The JFK/MLK link described above was huge.Quote:
Originally Posted by teamrican1
From time.com.
Quote:
Goldwater claims a proud civil rights record in his home state of Arizona.
He was the first chief of staff of the Arizona National Guard to desegregate the Air Guard. He was a member of the N.A.A.C.P. in the early 1950s, contributed $400 to the N.A.A.C.P. effort to get the Phoenix school system desegregated. He quit the N.A.A.C.P. several years ago, but he remains a member of the Urban League, which is also dedicated to the advancement of Negroes.
Again and again, Goldwater has said that he sympathizes with the Negro protest movement. "If I were a Negro," he recently said, "I don't think I would be very patient either." He endorses federal intervention, with troops if necessary, when state and local officials fail to maintain law and order in racial disputes. He subscribes to the idea that the Constitution empowers the Federal Government to protect Negroes against discrimination in interstate travel. And he believes that race discrimination by proprietors of stores and public accommodations is morally wrong (but not unconstitutional).
Interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkBuddha
I do understand and agree with his position, but many perceive this stance as racist and pro-discrimination. I am wondering if this PERCEPTION had anything to do with the Democrats being able to take the civil rights "baton" and run with it.
Misunderstanding and misinformation is the reason.
Goldwater is just the scapegoat.
:(
The Republicans do nothing to attempt to gaint he vote of minorities, the Democrats do.
Its pretty much as simple as that. If you have one group targeting you and giving you reasons to vote for them, and another group that doesn't bother and seems distant, then on average you're more likely to support that first group.
Republicans need to specifically attempt to say gain registered voters among new minority voters and specifically address minorities on why they should support them.
I wasn't alive then but as I understand it that was why he lost. The media is essentially trying to "Goldwater" Rand.Quote:
Originally Posted by misconstrued
That's not why he lost. Goldwater's position on Civil Rights were actually one of his more popular positions and the only thing LBJ worried about. He lost because there was a perception he would drag the USA in to a nuclear war (LBJ released a trio of absolutely devastating ads on this front), and because he was a godawful candidate.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkBuddha
In 1964 California essentially had Barry Goldwater's position on Civil Rights as a ballot initiative. Barry's position on Civil Rigths won 65% of the vote there while Barry himself only won 40% of the vote.