Is there a bigger example than LBJ going with big civil rights laws in the 60s and essentially ending his party's dominance in the South for...50+ years with no end in sight.
-
-
-
It did end the dominance, but that was the point. They did it because they assumed that the newly registered black voters would make up many lost white votes, and with the race issue gone, Southern whites would now vote like Northern whites.
-
Nopes. He didn't assume any such thing. He knew he was giving up the South for a while. He probably didn't guess it would be 50+ years but here we are.
-
Back then, “giving up the South” meant you stop winning 80-20, not that the GOP wins everything. Also, there’s no proof he ever said that, and even if he did, he knew that if he didn’t, Democrats would have suffered greatly with northern blacks.
-
The South had started to crack during the Ike years. I think Southern pols knew what would happen if they voted for the CRA and VRA. Johnson was quoted as saying it's gone for a generation.
-
There’s no proof he ever said that. And yes, the South had started to crack, but all that proves is that the CRA and VRA didn’t change as much as we think.
-
Regardless of the truth, Drucker is right. You have no idea how certain policies are going to change coalitions and priorities.
-
I agree with him. I don't think there is a bigger example of this than what LBJ did in the 60s. That was my point.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.