What can the Dems do to win the South...no offense

[boobiemiles]

I'm not looking to get barred here, but somethings need to be done for the better of all involoved. I use to live in NY but have relocated to Baltimore to get a higher cheaper

education....."Bushanomics" at work here folks. With that said the atmosphere here is anti Bush, but I've been told that the south likes Bush, and are highly in favaor of the Repubican party. The reasoning presented made sense to me in a way, but there are still questions I still need answered. I thought that maybe the south was in favor of Republican party because the African American community is aligned with the Democratic party, but that left more questions to answer. I thought maybe it was the aftermath of the civil war, but then I realized that Lincoln was a Repubilcan, and during the era of the Civil war Republicans wanted to abolish the systems of slavery. So at one point the South was Pro Democrats and Anti Republicans. Was LBJ right when he said that signing the Civil Rights acts would turn the South against the Democratic party for generations. Is it really over the Civil Rights Bills? Thats partt of the perception. Yada yada yada. Now I've seen a lot of people try and bash the Democrats as crazy and yahoos, but do they really look crazy now? Iraq is a mess with no answer, the economy is shakier than a tech stock, and the real estate market is suppose to go bust. I was surprised we re-elected Bush for a second term, but you cant cry about spilt milk. My question is what do the Democrats have to do to win back the South?

[SkinsHokieFan]

They never will, they are too arrogant.

However in Presidential elections there is a chance. You look at Clinton who won enough of the south.

Congressionally it'll be tough. The old "southern democrat" no longer exists or is part of the Republican party.

As long as guys like Howard Dean run the democratic party, it has no chance in the south. It needs more Mark Warner's, but Mark Warner is too far right for the rank and file democrat and therefore won't amount too much in the party

[Spaceman Spiff]

They need to stop acting like pansies? Jk

Here's the deal and I actually talked to an African American friend after the last election. He voted for Bush. He said a lot of his african american friends did the same...

1. The notion that Bush is just a spoiled rich kid and the Dems stick up for the little man ended when people realized that Kerry has married into money, twice. His wealth is just as inherited. People have begun to realize that in order to run for president you pretty much have to be rich and white no matter what side you're on. This has somewhat diluted the notion that the left side is there to stick up for the little man.

2. Some minorities feel that their votes are taken for granted, that Dems essentially say "Hey, you're a minority, you'll vote for us, right?" The last campaign, Kerry drove this feeling home by visiting a bunch of black churches at the last minute essentially giving that feeling.

Plus, you're in Baltimore which isn't really in the south. I mean, coming from NY it is, but compared to say, Georgia, there's a ton of difference. That, and college campuses are usually liberal, so its not suprising that you're hearing a bunch of anti Bush stuff.

Anyway, I know I'm probably going to get a lot of crap for saying that from Larry, Chom and all the other liberals on the board, but thats what came up in the discussion I had. Feel free to disagree, but I really don't care.

[HapHaszard]

Living here in the South, in order for the Dems to regain the south they would have to become "conservative" and not a liberal organization. The south has allways been conservative, when the Democratic Party was taken over by the Liberals, the southern people went Republican, with the high spending and all by the Republicans we are hearing a lot of talk about the Libertarian party. Its possible in the next 10 years the Republicans will be a "National party no more" to quote Zell Miller in his book.

[jbooma]

Maybe they can win the south when the lose people like you :doh:

People wake up this is not a north vs south thing, I am very scared of the future of this nation.

[E-Dog Night]

The south has allways been conservative, when the Democratic Party was taken over by the Liberals, the southern people went Republican, with the high spending and all by the Republicans we are hearing a lot of talk about the Libertarian party.

This is simply not true. The south always voted Democratic until the 1960's. The reason it switched has absolutely nothing with the "democratic party being taken over by liberals" or financial considerations.

The reason the south went from democratic to republican overnight is simply because the Democratic Party became associated with the civil rights movement. Kennedy was calling for equal rights and using his influence to help Martin Luther King (even though Kennedy, as an Irish Catholic, had no real love for African Americans and actually voted against a civil rights bill in 1957).

But when he ran for president he made it clear in his speeches that he was a supporter of civil rights. What isn't clear is why he was converted. My guess it was political -- he needed the black vote to beat Nixon. In any event, he became associated with being a champion of civil rights, and thus began the hatred of Massachusetts liberals by southerners. Lyndon Johnson's various civil rights in the years that followed further cemented the south's hate for democrats.

The south has voted Republican ever since.

[Kilmer17]

It was Republicans in both houses that passes Civil Rights legislation.

But the simple answer is this- The Dems can start winning in the south when they start focusing on issues that people in the South care about.

But as long as the Dems are a party of Howard Dean, Michael Moore, Hillary Clinton (not Bill mind you, but Hillary) Nancy Pelosi and the Susan and Tim Sarandons of the world, they're going to lose there. And lose by larger and larger margins.

[jbooma]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

But the simple answer is this- The Dems can start winning in the south when they start focusing on issues that people in the South care about.

Which are the same issues of the people in the North. We all want jobs, security, health care, and most of all out of our private lifes.

I would also say the only reason Bush won wasn't because Kerry was from the North, it was because many didn't trust him and instead of making a lot of changes decided to go with the status quo.

The economy was a large reason Bush won, most of americans are in a better position they are now then they were 4 years ago, economy is king and everyone knows that.

We are all amercians, north, south, west, etc... and we all basically have the same wants. The problem is you have individuals and organizations trying to tear us apart and that is what is mostly sad.

[Prosperity]

Why should Democrats try to change themeselves to win the south? It is the South that is the problem, the South ought to change itself if it wants to join the modern world. That goes for the mid west too.

Secondly the political culture is too different between the Deep South and the Northern states. You can't win both, maybe in a Presidential race but never in congressional elections.

[Kilmer17]

Originally posted by Liberty

Why should Democrats try to change themeselves to win the south? It is the South that is the problem, the South ought to change itself if it wants to join the modern world. That goes for the mid west too.

Secondly the political culture is too different between the Deep South and the Northern states. You can't win both, maybe in a Presidential race but never in congressional elections.

A perfect example of why the Dems cant win in the south. Thank you Liberty.

[Prosperity]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

A perfect example of why the Dems cant win in the south. Thank you Liberty.

Thank you, you don't know how much of a compliment that really is.

I am not a Dem and I doubt my ideas would ever win Southern states. Actually I am a little proud of that.

[E-Dog Night]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

It was Republicans in both houses that passes Civil Rights legislation.

But the simple answer is this- The Dems can start winning in the south when they start focusing on issues that people in the South care about.

But as long as the Dems are a party of Howard Dean, Michael Moore, Hillary Clinton (not Bill mind you, but Hillary) Nancy Pelosi and the Susan and Tim Sarandons of the world, they're going to lose there. And lose by larger and larger margins.

The Democrats had a majority of the both the Senate and the House during the 1960's. Your initial statement suggests that democrats were against civil rights, and it was those kind-hearted Republicans that came in and saved the day. False. Totally inaccurate.

These civil rights bills were passed by bipartisan support. And much of the republican support came as a result of Lyndon Johnson calling in every favor, pulling every string, and otherwise launching a massive lobbying effort.

In 1964, Barry Goldwater was the republican nominee, and in the ensuing election, Goldwater won only his home state of Arizona and five of "deep south" states – four of which had not voted Republican since 1876. I think that shows exactly how the political landscape changed during that era.

Like I mentioned previously, it was a matter of perception. Having spent four years living in Asheville, NC, I know exactly how white southerners, on the whole, feel about black people. I choose not to repeat here some of the things I've heard.

As far as the question, what can dems do to win the south; I don't think they can anytime soon. This country has become so divided and the Republican Party has smartly associated itself as the party of the down home, country boy with All-American values. I think most southerners view democrats as homo-loving, black-loving, taxing and spending meddlers who think they are smarter than everyone else.

The truth is that George Bush has spent more than any other president in history and his policies don't actually have the average white guy's best interest in mind (unless he's really rich).

But it doesn't matter. It's all about cultural representation, and Republicans have positioned themselves to culturally represent not just the south but most rural states. And to change that, we would either need a type of social revolution that we saw in the 1960's, or to have the Republicans blunder so horrifically that no one would want to be associated with them. And it doesn't appear that either one of those two scenarios are likely to happen soon, although you never know.

[jbooma]

Originally posted by Liberty

Why should Democrats try to change themeselves to win the south? It is the South that is the problem, the South ought to change itself if it wants to join the modern world. That goes for the mid west too.

Secondly the political culture is too different between the Deep South and the Northern states. You can't win both, maybe in a Presidential race but never in congressional elections.

You live in the south :laugh:

The culture is not as different as you think. I have familes both in Boston and South Carolina, and guess what they are a lot alike. Most of you have no clue what you are talking about because you have not lived in both places and felt the culture up front. All you do is go off on what you hear or read, which is very pathetic if you ask me.

[Kilmer17]

Yes, the Dems controlled both Houses, but the GOP support for Civil Rights legislation was almost 100%. It was DEMOCRATS that fought over it. The GOP was on board en masse.

Liberty, whether or not you are Dem is irrelevant. You're view and hatred of the South is what people IN THE SOUTH associate with the Dem party. That's why they lose. So even if you're not a DEM, Southern Voters think you are. And the DEM party doesnt do anything to change that perception.

[Prosperity]

Originally posted by jbooma

You live in the south :laugh:

Virginia is a mixed case it is headed toward civilization pretty quick, though it still has many remnants of the old backwards days. But there are some very rual parts of VA that I wouldn't want to live in.

[Prosperity]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

Liberty, whether or not you are Dem is irrelevant. You're view and hatred of the South is what people IN THE SOUTH associate with the Dem party. That's why they lose. So even if you're not a DEM, Southern Voters think you are. And the DEM party doesnt do anything to change that perception.

Well that kinda proves my point about the South.

The GOP has a marvelous poltical machine, the Dems are kind of helpless. It isn't really that most or even many Dems are like me, but that the GOP knows what their base hates so they pain the Dems that way.

[jbooma]

For those that think the dems can't win in the south then I bet you forgot about Bill Clinton. The Dems would have won the last election if they had someone besides Kerry to run, it isn't the party it is the candidate that is the problem.

Now the people in NH who want to leave the US, they are crazy :laugh:

[E-Dog Night]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

Yes, the Dems controlled both Houses, but the GOP support for Civil Rights legislation was almost 100%. It was DEMOCRATS that fought over it. The GOP was on board en masse.

That's debatable. When you look at these statistics on how the voting went for the civil rights movement, it appears to support your argument:

The Senate Version:

Democratic Party: 46-22

Republican Party: 27-6

The Senate Version, voted on by the House:

Democratic Party: 153-91

Republican Party: 136-35

But then you look at these statiscis:

The Original House Version:

Southern Democrats: 7-87

Southern Republicans: 0-10

Northern Democrats: 145-9

Northern Republicans: 138-24

The Senate Version:

Southern Democrats: 1-21

Southern Republicans: 0-1

Northern Democrats: 46-1

Northern Republicans: 27-5

So it's hard to claim that the republicans were on board in masse and the democrats were totally divided.

[ntotoro]

When the mainstream Democrats can further distance themselves from the ideology of the progressive secularists in the left wing of the Democratic Party, then they can stand a legitimate chance of winning the White House. Bush was a defeatable candidate, but not by the likes of John Kerry, Howard Dean or Hillary Clinton.

Nick

[Kilmer17]

We can go back to the pre primary days and I bet find a couple of dozen threads on how the Dems could win. Most involved Dick Gephart on the ticket in some fashion, or John Edwards.

[Destino]

Before the Dems can do anything about the "south" they need to combat the right wing PR machine. To do so the party leadership has to get more control so that a more uniform message can be deilvered.

1 - Take on the "bias media" myth head on mocking and refusing to take any right-winger that cries bias seriously. They'll laugh back at you at first, but if you stay on message as a party in a year or two republicans will be too scared of making jokes of themselves to utter the words "liberal media." This has to be addressed first because the GOP uses this tactic to escape all criticism.

2 - Reclaim the political center and abandon the extreme left. It doesn’t take a genius to see that the far left has little or nothing in common with the large majority of the Democratic Party. The loud few are clouding the vision and holding back the party. They refuse to accept the concept of “the big tent” and instead hold the party ransom by threatening to abandon ship last minute if their demands are met. Send these fools to the green party where they can do no harm.

3 - End the myth of the “tough guy” conservative that the young people find appealing. Laugh at them for freaking out over a woman’s shoulder being exposed before a football game. Point out the backward reality that much of the GOP base would like to see. Stop them from putting the loonies in the basement; drag the base that wins elections for them out into the spotlight to replace the men in nice suits the GOP currently puts there.

Now that you taken on the GOP image you've won most of the battle. Time to start thinking “what can we do to make life better for middle class white people.” Acknowledge their fears address their concerns. The days of high taxes and big goverment are gone, thorugh the use of technology and better service models that same services the democrats believe in can be provided at much less cost.

[Soliloquy]

Originally posted by jbooma

For those that think the dems can't win in the south then I bet you forgot about Bill Clinton.

He was a Southern governor, and the Dems ought to take note of that fact if they want to regain the WH.

Senators and Northern governors won't cut it.

[Thiebear]

Pick a candidate FROM the south

and woo them like its a first date with Jessica Alba...

They probably could have won the last election if they had picked whats his name FROM OHIO.... (Dennis Kucenich)sp?

[Prosperity]

Originally posted by Thiebear

Pick a candidate FROM the south

and woo them like its a first date with Jessica Alba...

They probably could have won the last election if they had picked whats his name FROM OHIO.... (Dennis Kucenich)sp?

Kucinich would get painted as a Socialist, and he kind of is.

[E-Dog Night]

Yeah, although I sort of like Dennis Kucinich, he's on the far-far left of every issue. I don't think that's good for America, any more than I know the far-far right of the Bush administration is horrible for this country.