Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Pernicious Lie: Liberals, Civil Rights, and Southern Voting Patterns
On Facebook today, a liberal friend claimed that “[racist] Democrats fled to the Republican party when the [Democrats] started talking about civil rights legislation.” I pointed out that that was completely untrue. The only prominent Democrat who became a Republican was Strom Thurmond who — as a Democrat — famously ran for president on a pro-segregation platform and filibustered civil rights legislation in the Senate; as a Republican, though, he had black staff, and voted to make Martin Luther King, Jr.’s birth a national holiday and Clarence Thomas an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. In contrast, George Wallace, Robert C. Byrd, Bull Connor, Orval Faubus, etc. all stayed Democrats.
I asked him why — if his narrative were true — Southerners continued to support Democrats for more than 30 years after the Civil Rights Movement. To which he replied, “My point was the [Democrats’] hold on the South began to die with the Civil Rights Act. That was when the GOP started to gain traction.” I again replied that that was completely untrue; Democrats maintained their grip on the South well into the 1990s.
Not being willing to give up on a good talking point, the liberal insisted:
Yes the shift began with that legislation, but it wasn’t overnight. If it wasn’t that, can you explain to me why that’s the only reliable voting block for the GOP during presidential elections? Mississippi hasn’t had a [Democratic senator] since 1972. Alabama had two [Democrats] as senators for decades until around 1980. Such a funny coincidence. I know conservatives don’t like why they gained popularity in the South, but come on now.
“Wasn’t overnight” is an overstatement when referring to the political shift that took between a quarter to a half century. It’s an intellectually lazy and dishonest view of history. As Kevin D Williamson put it in his excellent May 28, 2012, cover story for National Review, “The Party of Civil Rights:”
Even if the Republicans’ rise in the South had happened suddenly in the 1960s (it didn’t) and even if there were no competing explanation (there is), racism — or, more precisely, white southern resentment over the political successes of the civil-rights movement — would be an implausible explanation for the dissolution of the Democratic bloc in the old Confederacy and the emergence of a Republican stronghold there. That is because those southerners who defected from the Democratic party in the 1960s and thereafter did so to join a Republican party that was far more enlightened on racial issues than were the Democrats of the era, and had been for a century.
Since my liberal interlocutor had brought up Mississippi and Alabama — and made factual claims about their US Senators — I decided to look at their electoral histories on the state and federal levels.
Contrary to his claims, Mississippi in fact had two Democratic Senators from 1881 until 1978, and then one Democrat Senator until 1989. In Alabama, it’s true that they had “two Democrats as Senators for decades until around 1980.” The liberal labeled this “a funny coincidence.” I’m not sure what’s coincidental about “racist southern Democrats” waiting 16 years to finally act on their racism by electing a Republican to the Class III Senate seat, but I would note that the Republican, Jeremiah Denton, served only one term before “racist souther Democrats” elected a Democrat to the seat (Richard Shelby, who was elected as a Democrat before coming to his senses and switching to the Republican Party in 1994). The Class II Senate seat in Alabama remained filled by a Democrat from 1871-1997. (Coincidence!?)
Furthermore, Mississippi had a Democrat Governor from 1876-1992, and then again from 2000-2004. It had a Democrat-controlled state senate from Reconstruction to 2003, and a Democrat-controlled state house from Reconstruction to 2011.
Alabama had a Democrat Governor from 1876-1987, 1993-1995, and 1999-2003; a Democrat-controlled state senate from Reconstruction to 2011, and a Democrat-controlled state house of representatives from Reconstruction to 2011.
Here’s a fuller list for Mississippi and Alabama (similar results are found in other southern states):
Mississippi:
Winner of Electoral College (US Presidential Election):
- 1876-1944: Democrats
- 1948: States Rights Democratic Party (Strom Thurmond, at the time a Democrat Senator)
- 1952-1956: Democrats
- 1960: Unpledged Democrat
- 1964: Republican (Barry Goldwater)
- 1968: American Independent Party (George Wallace)
- 1972: Republican (Nixon)
- 1976: Democrat (Carter)
- 1980-2012: Republicans (Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney)
- 1876-1992: Democrats
- 1992-2000: Republican
- 2000-2004: Democrat
- 2004-2016: Republicans
State Senate:
- Democrats held majority from Reconstruction until 2003
State House of Representatives:
- Democrats held majority from Reconstruction until 2011
US Congressional Delegation:
US Senate:
- Class I: Democrats from 1881-1989
- Class II: Democrats from 1877-1977
US House Delegation:
- 1885-1965: All seats held by Democrats
- 1965-1967: 4 Ds, 1 R
- 1967-1973: All seats held by Democrats
- 1973-1981: 3 D, 2 R
- 1981-1983: 4 D, 1 R
- 1983-1987: 3 D, 2 R
- 1987-1990: 4 D, 1 R
- 1990-1995: All Seats held by Democrats
- 1995-1997: 3 D, 2 R
- 1997-1999: 2 D, 3 R (the first time Rs had a majority of US Representatives from Mississippi)
- 1999-2003: 3 D, 2 R (Oh, that didn’t last long)
- 2003-2008: 2 D, 2 R (Mississippi lost one House seat in 2000 census)
- 2008-2011: 3 D, 1 R
- 2011-2015: 1 D, 3 R
- 2015-2017: 1 D, 2 R (One of the Rs died from cancer last week)
Alabama:
Winner of Electoral College (US Presidential Election)*
- 1876-1944: Democrats
- 1948: States Rights Democratic Party (Strom Thurmond, at the time a Democrat Senator)
- 1952-1956: Democrats
- 1960: Unpledged Democrat
- 1964: Republican (Barry Goldwater)
- 1968: American Independent Party (IE, George Wallace, a Democrat)
- 1972: Republican (Nixon)
- 1976: Democrat (Carter)
- 1980-2012: Republicans (Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney)
- 1874-1987: Democrats (including George Wallace’s three post-CRA terms, as well as his wife’s single term)
- 1987-1993: Republican
- 1993-1995: Democrat
- 1995-1999: Republican
- 1999-2003: Democrat
- 2003-2017: Republicans
State Senate:
- Democrats held the majority from Reconstruction to the 2010 election.
State House of Representatives:
- Democrats held the majority from Reconstruction to the 2010 election.
US Congressional Delegation
US Senate: Class II:
- 1871-1997: Democrats
- 1997- 2020: Republican (Jeff Sessions)
US Senate: Class III:
- 1879-1981: Democrats
- 1981-1987: Republican (Jeremiah Denton)
- 1987-1994: Democrat (Richard Shelby was elected first as a Democrat)
- 1994-2017: Republican (Shelby switched parties)
US House:
- 1877-1885: No Republicans in delegation
- 1885-1885: 7 D, 1 R (one R server from January to March of 1885)
- 1885-1890: No Republicans in delegation
- 1890-1891: 7 D, 1 R (An R served from June, 1890, to March, 1891)
- 1891-1896: No Republicans in Delegation
- 1896-1897: 5 D, 2 R, 2 P (Populist)
- 1897-1898: 7 D, 1 P
- 1898-1901: 8 D, 1 R
- 1901-1965: No Republicans in delegation
- 1965-1967: 2 D, 5R (Aha! After the 1964 Civil Rights act, the racist Democrats put Republicans in office.)
- 1967-1973: 5D, 3 R (…and then went right back to voting for a majority of Democrats in the Alabama delegation to the US House)
- 1973-1983: 4 D, 3 R (Alabama lost a House seat in 1970 census)
- 1983-1993: 5 D, 2 R
- 1993-1997: 4 D, 3 R
- 1997-2009: 2 D, 5 R
- 2009-2010: 3 D, 4R
- 2010-2011: 2 D, 5 R (A D switched to R)
- 2011-2017: 1 D, 6R
So there you have it. According to my liberal friend, racist Democrats were so upset about the Democratic Party abandoning its racist past and joining with the Republicans to pass civil rights legislation that they continued to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats in their states for 30, 40, and 45 years — as well as for Democrats George Wallace and Jimmy Carter for president — before finally becoming Republicans.
But let’s not let facts get in the way of a good narrative.
Edit: Originally I accidentally identified Clarence Thomas as the first black Supreme Court Justice, when of course that was Thurgood Marsall. Thanks, Klaatu, for pointing that out. For the record, Strom Thurmond voted against Marshall in 1967, after he became a Republican.
Published in General
Better you than me, Albert! Sheesh!
FWIW, Thurgood Marshall was the first black associate justice of the Supreme Court.
I was thinking that when I read the post, but you beat me to the comment.
DESPITE that, republicans have been the party of civil rights pretty much all along. It’s only when shysters like Jesse Jackson came along that the democrats took control of the black vote.
Note that Richard Daley The First had 5 black wards in his 11 wards lock. They were delivered at each election by the congressman from there, who got his via the democrat machine kick-back. Democrats only hold the black vote via bribery.
The Democratic Party is the 1) party of slavery, 2) the party of Jim Crow, 3) the party that started the KKK, 4) the party of Bull Connor, 5) the party of voting fraud …. so many nasty things on race.
In 1994, the South flipped (Newt’s state, Georgia, flipped from 8 to 1 Democrat to 8 to 1 Republican [I think that’s about right]). I have read in several places over the years that the hardcore racists in the south stayed in the Democratic Party and simply couldn’t support any Republicans. It looks like the moderate southerners moved away from the Democratic Party finally in 1994.
But, the Dems are busy trying to hide this. I posted on one such attempt recently.
Doh! Thurgood Marshall!
I’m looking on my iPhone and the formatting for my post all messed up. Is it for everyone else too?
Yeah, kinda sorta…
Mundy Peterson
Sorry about the formatting. I’ve fixed it now.
Well, don’t assert overreaching things. The fact is that Southerners did begin to leave the Democratic Party in the 1960s, but that was a trickle, and I think more due to anti-war activism among party elites. At the 1968 convention the Dems started to set aside delegate seats for special-interest groups (women and blacks at first). That was the beginning of a shift of some racists from Democrat to Republican.
Yes, there are racists in the GOP. The real obnoxious stereotypical Southern racist that the lamestream media have in mind are very few in number, and are so disaffected that hardly any of them vote at all. They generally spout off about how there is no real difference between the parties and they cannot bring themselves to vote for either side, so they stay home.
But there are some racists in the GOP. They don’t have any influence, and are generally avoided by everyone who knows who they are. If they ever manage to speak up, which they rarely do, everyone who thinks they may want to run for office someday looks for a quick exit to the room.
I hear lots of awful race-hatred on the radio, but that is because I listen some to the large black station from downtown. The racism in the GOP is pale and thin compared to them.
It’s worse than that. If you look at the South as a whole, the Democrats began losing their lock in the 1920s, which is to say that Republicans breaking the Democratic lock on the South led over time to the circumstances where the South wouldn’t have the power to block Civil Rights Legislation, but even then it took nearly a hundred years for the Democrats to be driven out of office.
As has been pointed out a thousand times (but if you want the scholarly cite, I recommend Thom and Mary Edsel, Chain Reaction), politics in the South is largely driven by economic and foreign policy concerns, and has been ever since industrialization began there. It’s actually a great example of how economic development can solve a bunch of social problems.
And the purveyors of that race-hatred are Democrats.
Thank you for doing this.
QUESTION) Can you tag this conversation with “data”?
I’ve been toying with the idea of doing some data posts, but as you well know, they take time and energy since the stats aren’t always easy to get at.
QUESTION) Can you link your sources?
FYI, there is some discussion of this topic in another recent conversation. Thanks again.
http://ricochet.com/selma-wont-win-oscar-democrat-distortions/
Yeah, that about sums it up. Hope you enjoyed it.
One more thing: the Democrats are the party that opposed woman’s suffrage. Not only did they oppose the passage of the amendment (which Republicans supported), but in the early 1800s they were the party that removed the right of women to vote in New Jersey. (New Jersey allowed one vote per household, and that vote could be cast by either a woman or a man. So, not only did Democrats rob women of the vote – they robbed widows.
Seawriter
This is true and much of the cause is the MSM portraying Republicans as racists. If the overwhelmingly popular narrative is that Republicans are racists and you are a racist, what party would you, at least nominally, identify with? (Speaking primarily of racists targeting Blacks and Hispanics.)
It is some consolation that Leftist Jew-haters now openly ally themselves with the Dems, making them the go-to party for anti-Semitism. In this case it’s counter to the media narrative but so pervasive that they can’t hide it.
Thanks for fixing the formatting. And thanks for taking the time to put this up. It’s important.
Well done!
Added “data” tag. I got most of my information from Wikipedia and Ballotpedia, as well as looking at some local newspaper articles from just after the 2010 election. Tom has added some links to the original post, for which I thank him.
Racist.
The first Republican to win electoral college votes in the South was Hoover, which isn’t necessarily as helpful as one might want, but the second Republican to win votes in the South was Ike, one of history’s greatest integrationists. It’s pretty hard to argue that “I propose to use whatever authority exists in the office of the President to end segregation in the District of Columbia, including the Federal Government, and any segregation in the Armed Forces” is a dog whistle to racists, but the South seemed happy with him.
I just posted this in the other thread, but it seems relevant here, too.
James Of England
It’s not that long ago. The guy who refused to desegregate Little Rock, requiring the Republican Eisenhower to send in the National Guard was Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus. Faubus was embraced by Bill Clinton, who repeatedly honored him, putting a bust of him up on the capitol and such. Hillary Clinton is likely the be the nominee next cycle. Today’s Democrats still have ties to the worst of the abusers.
To the more direct charge, look at the 20 Democratic Senators who voted against the Civil Rights Act.
Alabama: Joseph Hill. Died a Democrat
Alabama: John Sparkman. Died a Democrat. Adlai Stevenson’s Veep nominee.
Arkansas: James Fulbright. Died a Democrat. Also still a hero to today’s Dems.
Arkansas: John McClellan. Died a Democrat.
Florida: Spessard Holland. Died a Democrat.
Florida: George Smathers. Died a Democrat. Current Democratic Senator Bill Nelson interned for him.
Georgia: Richard Russell. Died a Democrat.
Georgia: Herman Talmadge. Died a Democrat.
Louisiana: Allen Ellender. Died a Democrat.
Louisiana: Russel Long. Died a Democrat.
Mississippi: James Eastland. Died a Democrat.
Mississippi: John Stennis. Died a Democrat. A key opponent of Bork’s nomination.
North Carolina: Samuel Ervin. Died a Democrat. Led the Senate Watergate Committee.
North Carolina: Benjamin Jordan. Died a Democrat.
South Carolina: Olin Johnston. Died a Democrat.
Tennessee: Al Gore. Died a Democrat. His son was the Democrat Presidential nominee in 2000.
Tennessee: Herbert Walters. Died a Democrat.
Virginia: Harry Byrd. Died a Democrat.
Virginia: Absalom Robertson. Died a Democrat.
West Virginia: Robert Byrd. Died a Democrat. Leading opponent to Bush 43.
That doesn’t look to me like a demographic that can be fairly claimed to have switched entirely. When we talk about the New Deal, Medicare, Medicaid, Watergate, Vietnam opposition, opposition to McCarthy, or any of the other stuff that these guys engaged in, no one says that that’s really the Republicans. And they’re right not to. That was the Democratic party.
Thanks for posting this Albert Arthur. Liberals love to claim the moral high ground on every issue including (or maybe especially) race. Their claim that the white racists left the Dems after the Civil Rights Act is of a piece with that tendency. Southern Democrats from the Civil War through the 1960’s came in all political stripes including progressive. Some of the southern progressives who supported Jim Crow include Woodrow Wilson, Claude Pepper, J William Fulbright Hale Boggs and Theodore Bilbo.
I think the crux of the liberal lie is that the voters switched sides, not necessarily the politicians.
We know for a fact that Southern voters switched from a reliable Democratic bloc to a reliable GOP bloc. The liberal claim is that:
It seems to me that there is no real evidence for claim #1 and the claim #2 is a vile, baseless slander of an entire region of the United States.
However providing lists of dead Democratic Senators who voted against the Civil Rights Act doesn’t really refute #1 and says nothing about #2.
Nice job. Answering stupid liberal posts on facebook is tough. I usually try not to, even though some posts really piss me off big time.
Once I made a similar argument to someone who made a similar claim, and they just said, “All the racists today are Republicans, you can’t really be denying that.” At which point I realized that this person was going by nothing other than their ‘gut feeling’. They had no evidence, and ignored or questioned the validity of the facts. Sounds like your facebook friend did the same, but let’s hope these people mull it over and have some a-ha moments at some point in the future!
Re: J flei
Yeah… The response I got on facebook to this (not from the original liberal but from someone else) was, “everyone knows the Republicans used a southern strategy to appeal to the racist vote.”
From the Leftist perspective, there is evidence for claim #1. Regarding race discrimination, the Left equates “civil rights” with racial preferences, which the GOP certainly opposes. The GOP also opposed such policies as the “Lilly Ledbetter” act (which eviscerated the statute of limitations applicable to certain pay discrimination claims) and the addition of homosexuals as another protected class under the anti-discrimination statutes.
Don’t get me wrong – I agree with the GOP on these issues. In my view, the Left’s position on “civil rights” seeks not equality, but rather desires a “playing field” permanently tilted toward favored “minorities.” [I put “minorities” in quotes because about 70% of the population is a “minority” in the view of the Left, including Blacks, Hispanics, women, and homosexuals.]
My point is that, as the modern Left defines “civil rights,” the modern GOP is the opposition.
The claim is often made about the politicians. It’s mostly based on Strom Thurmond, who had switched. Shelby’s switch in ’94 is also sometimes included, preposterously. But if you’d prefer that I targeted a different fallacy, then that’s fine, too.
I don’t think it’s clear that southern voters switched en masse, either. The Solid South was a reconstruction phenomenon that gradually breaks. Roosevelt got Missouri in 1904, showing that the craziness of that era had worn off, and Wilson overplayed his hand dialing southern pride up to 11. Harding’s return to normalcy was somewhat successful in the South. The Klan, like Wilson (not entirely coincidentally) pushed hard to bring everyone on board with its plan, and collapsed. The 1928, post Klan, election didn’t feature a remotely solid South.
Obviously, FDR won the south, but he didn’t win it as a southerner. He won it like he won everywhere else. There were substantial numbers of voters still who wouldn’t vote for a Republican come heck or high water, but they were elderly and dying. Their children voted for Ike.
After Wilson, presidentially, there’s no solid south, for either side, just a South that each side wins sometimes and the sides split sometimes. Until Bush, really; the geographical snobbery/ hostility to Bush was extremely helpful.
You can see this in state legislature races, where the personalities matter less and the party ID more, since few people know much about their state reps. The past couple of decades have seen a swing, but in 2000, there were only 7/32 chambers held by the GOP in the Southern Legislative Conference. 2004 was a very good year for us in that regard, and things picked up pace from there, but that’s 40 years after the Civil Rights Act. The median age of a voter is 44. A change that takes 40 years to take hold isn’t a change in the votes, it’s a change in the electorate. The youngest of the reconstruction era voters that kept the South Solid died a long time ago.
Does anyone think that the Civil Rights Act and related events were minor issues in ’56, when Ike won the South on an integration platform and in ’76, when Carter won the South after keeping quiet about his support for “ethnic purity” for a full year, but that segregation and race were the dominant issues in 2000? That the South really started to move when people decided the Democrats were serious about this no whites only schools thing?
You’re quite right about that. Voter ID laws are often cited as well as “proof” the GOP wants to disenfranchise minority voters. Plus opposition to open borders and amnesty are routinely attributed to xenophobia and nativism.