Jump to content
The Education Forum

LBJ and George Bush


John Simkin
 Share

Recommended Posts

When LBJ signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act he made a prophecy that he was “signing away the south for 50 years”. This proved fairly accurate. In fact, the Democrats have never recovered the vote of the white racists in the Deep South. This is the electorate that now gives its support to the Republican Party.

In the 2004 election Bush won every state in the Deep South. There is now talk of Hillary Clinton being the Democratic Party candidate in 2008. That will be political suicide. The only two Democratic Party presidential candidates who have done well since the resignation of LBJ are Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Both are southern Baptists. The only way the Democratic Party can win the next election is by having someone that Christian Fundamentalists in the Deep South feel comfortable with. This will involve the candidate shifting the issue of morality to cover areas like poverty and inequality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is gospel--Heaven help us.

Since when did Reason become the AntiChrist? Oh that's right-it's always been.

Some of us thought it was possible, that we'd save ourselves from the devil and turn back the tide that is said to be sweeping the nation.

It's a collective letdown. There's a flight or fight response among us more disillusioned in the States, John. Where do we go now?

I'm unable to stand the gloating of the RR much longer. We must now join in the undoing of so much we worked for in the sixties? "Hell no, we won't go!"Shatter the states into little bits of Heaven amid the red states but never give up. Kerry are you hearing this?

Not ashamed to say I voted for the John Kerry who was the anti VN war candidate. Pro-choice Pro stem cell research. The man who headed the commission to get the goods on Bush. The man who pulled away the curtain a bit so we could see the wizard; the man who pitched good spirited, truly moral reforms in the US. Religion got nothing to do with what is right and wrong. No, the Right doesn't corner market on this. Kerry represented this for us and he was what we had to work with. Now-- where's that grail?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put in my two (or twenty) cents on the other thread regarding the election and I came to the same conclusion, John. The election ended up not being so much about terrorism or economic policy as it was about "who would I like to have over for dinner?" This notion that having "shared values" should be the leading factor behind one's vote is a dangerous one. Can you imagine a company whose presidency is determined by the President having "shared values" with the stockholders, even though he's revealed himself to be an arrogant, dissembling, incompetent??? Such a company would not last long. I expect that the U.S. under Bush will continue its decline and that within four years we'll be something like Britain after WWI, i.e. clearly on our way down.

The only hope for the Democrats is to find a Christian Southerner with true compassion and a lot of brains. Is there such a person?? Oh yeah, there is. I voted for him twice. His name's Bill Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill Clinton's personal shenanigans have done nothing to help the Democratic party IMO. In addition, it may be that the voters consider Clinton and the Democrats to have been more responsible for 9-11 than Bush. I find that difficult to believe, as I will always recall Bush's continuing with his chat in Sarasota after the first plane hit, choosing to abrogate his functions as Commander-in-Chief. So, if the Democrats want to have an impact they are going to have to start from scratch and rebuild, at least for the next few years.

Pamela McElwain-Brown :surfing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the percentages of the different groups who voted for Bush: Evangelical/Born Again (78), Protestant (59), Catholic (52), Jewish (25), Gun Ownership (63), Homosexuals (23), Trade Union Members (38), Married With Children (59), More than $200k (62), Less than $50k (43), White (58), Black (11), Men (55) and Women (48).

It is no coincidence that Bush did so well with the religious groups (except Jews who have a long record of holding liberal political views). People were asked: “What was the most important issue to you when voting?” as they left the polling booth. This was the result: Moral Values (22), Economy (20), Terrorism (19), Iraq (15), Healthcare (8), Taxes (5) and Education (4).

Other factors that need to be taken into consideration include the numbers who bothered to vote. A high percentage of the Evangelical/Born Again Christians decided to cast their vote (20.7m for Bush). Whereas other groups that overwhelmingly supported Kerry (Blacks and those living in poverty) had low turnout rates. This was especially true in the Deep South. Despite having a lot of blacks and people living in poverty, every state was won by Bush. The reason for this is the turnout rate.

It is highly unlikely that Christian groups will lose their faith during the next four years. In the past these groups abstained in large numbers (Bush did not have much of an impact on this in 2000).

To win in 2008 the Democrats have to find someone who is appealing to those Christians in the Deep South. If they don’t do that, they will be beaten by the Republican candidate who will definitely be chosen to represent these views.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My political sympathies are with Pam, but I agree with Pat and John.

For whatever reason this country has swung more to the right. I don't like this, but I want a candidate who can win. I was a big Dean supporter, but I knew the lying Republicans would do to him what they had done to George McGovern in 72 and Bush would trounce him. So I gladly supported Kerry, all the while worrying that he was a Massachusetts liberal that W would paint as a "leftist pinko".

We need someone who can beat them at their own game. I hate to say it but remember JFK??? He was able to outdo Tricky Dick in the Cold War arena, only to become the president who would die trying to thaw this "war". We need someone like that. Clinton had that kind of passion and charisma and Jimmy Carter had real morality.

We need to be VERY careful next time. No surprises. I for one did not know about the swift boat xxxx who has plagued Kerry since he entered politics. But Kerry did and that he did not properly address this following the convention was a political disaster. He also needed to have been stronger on the marriage issue. That his state would sanction gay marriage was terrible timing for him and he needed to take W on and perhaps offend gays. Hell, this is high stakes, and pragmastism was called for- (I cannot believe it is me saying this!)- but I am tired of seeing our side lose to the right wing. We have got to learn to beat them, we know the dirty tricks they always employ. It's time the Democratic party anticipates and prepares for this.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...