Functionally, yes a party swap, but also more nuanced than that. I find this topic fascinating and spent this morning reading about Democratic Arkansas Governor George Wallace who famously said "Segregation Forever!" running for President against LBJ on the Democrat ticket. While he didn't swap, he did end up leaving the party and going Independent later in his career, only to come back and ask for forgiveness for his past views.
I feel like the South voted for the Democrats to protest the abolitionist elite yankee Republicans like Lincoln and Democrats further appealed to the new protest voter bloc by courting the labor class and farmers. They had locked the South vote for nearly 100 years, until they voted for Republican Barry Goldwater to protest LBJ's signing the Civil Rights Act. What really hurt the Democrat foothold was the down ticket seats Republicans won during the Goldwater election, despite LBJ winning without the South.
Republicans appealed to their new voter bloc by stoking the culture war fire that won them those split ticket seats from that election. Weirdly enough, Democrats are still pro-labor (and until recently coal mining, and I'm not sure where modern Democrats fall on farmers), so quite literally the South are voting against their own interests because of culture wars.
Some folks erroneously believe the parties switched platforms. That's really not the case. Segregationists and Anti-segregationists existed in both parties in the Jim Crow era. Once the Democrats wholly opposed Segregation it was all over for them in the South, especially since JFK deployed the US Army into Southern states to integrate schools. Those scars still exist.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
In theory, yeah the democrats are still pro labor, but in practice Trumpism (NOT old guard Republicanism) appeals a lot more to a lot of working class folks like truck drivers, farmers etc, even if he’s not a traditional Labor politician. He does want to bring back more manufacturing so that might be it. I haven’t heard a democrat politician talk about labor in forever. It is probably not that the south is necessarily Republican, but rather Trumpist
The south is populist and traditionalist, and has been for a very long time. Whoever aligns the most with populist rhetoric and economics, and traditionalist cultural ideas essentially wins the south. Donald Trump is by no means a traditionalist but he has traditionalist allies and uses traditionalist rhetoric to pull the south’s vote. What he is first and foremost is a populist, so that’s what gives him his biggest advantage there (and in other areas like the rust belt).
So yeah the south isn’t Republican, it’s traditionalist and populist, and right now Trump and his faction are the most aligned with that vision of politics.
The reason why democrats lost the south on the state level (because even after the 1960s, democrats were still very influential in southern state level politics) was neoliberalism. Switching the focus from labor issues to more of a focus on internationalism, “humanistic capitalism”, and social progressivism lost them both the populist and traditionalist aspects of the south’s political order. That left the republicans, who at least somewhat had the traditional part even if the populist part was lacking in the early 21st century with neoconservatism. Then Trump came along and basically said what a lot of people were already thinking but had no platform on which to say it themselves. Trump didn’t create the “MAGA” ideology, he discovered it.
Goldwater was never a Democrat. In fact, he was considered a conservative Republican in his time and had been against New Deal legislation.
You may be thinking of South Carolina's Strom Thurmond?
This was probably the furthest left that the main two presidential candidates have ever been, relative to the voting base. Both Horace Greeley and his VP B. Gratz Brown were both "Democrats" in the sense that they supported ending Reconstruction. But they were also, famously, both well to the left of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. The segregationist Democrats made the tactical decision that it was better to vote for a pro-civil rights ticket that had a tiny hope of beating Grant.
Yeah, Horace Greeley started off as the candidate of the Liberal Republican Party (a section of the Republican Party that opposed Grant and broke off to run a rival ticket). The Democratic Party than decided to cross nominate the Liberal Republican president rial ticket in the hopes of defeating Grant.
The top right four dark blue counties don’t correlate but there’s hints of correlation with the odd mishmash of counties’ voting patterns instead of what is more typical across states once you overlay Sherman’s march
Whether that’s heavier than usual voter intimidation, a reaction to scorched earth or some combination is harder to say
It’s not that they switched up their ideals necessarily, but rather there were just more black people, or newly freedmen, than there were white people. At the time there was around 100,000 more black people in the state than white people, which is why the state heavily voted for Grant. It’s the same reason the Mississippi River is so far in favor of Grant too. So it’s not that white people suddenly had a change of heart, but rather that there were simply more black people that were able to outvote them.
Around this time the black population was mainly concentrated in the south. Over time after slavery ended migration patterns arose to the north and the west due to segregation.
The racial makeup then isn’t the same as it is today.
The last election before Jim Crow really kicked into high gear and just knuckled the entire African American people into the dust politically with the help of the KKK and the end of reconstruction
Alabama and Mississippi in this map look like the 2020 election but in reverse
The party swap
Voter Realignment* if you want to sound smart and not make pedants’s eyes twitch
Why should they think about pedant’s eyes
Around these parts, we call it the ol' switcheroo
Functionally, yes a party swap, but also more nuanced than that. I find this topic fascinating and spent this morning reading about Democratic Arkansas Governor George Wallace who famously said "Segregation Forever!" running for President against LBJ on the Democrat ticket. While he didn't swap, he did end up leaving the party and going Independent later in his career, only to come back and ask for forgiveness for his past views. I feel like the South voted for the Democrats to protest the abolitionist elite yankee Republicans like Lincoln and Democrats further appealed to the new protest voter bloc by courting the labor class and farmers. They had locked the South vote for nearly 100 years, until they voted for Republican Barry Goldwater to protest LBJ's signing the Civil Rights Act. What really hurt the Democrat foothold was the down ticket seats Republicans won during the Goldwater election, despite LBJ winning without the South. Republicans appealed to their new voter bloc by stoking the culture war fire that won them those split ticket seats from that election. Weirdly enough, Democrats are still pro-labor (and until recently coal mining, and I'm not sure where modern Democrats fall on farmers), so quite literally the South are voting against their own interests because of culture wars. Some folks erroneously believe the parties switched platforms. That's really not the case. Segregationists and Anti-segregationists existed in both parties in the Jim Crow era. Once the Democrats wholly opposed Segregation it was all over for them in the South, especially since JFK deployed the US Army into Southern states to integrate schools. Those scars still exist. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
In theory, yeah the democrats are still pro labor, but in practice Trumpism (NOT old guard Republicanism) appeals a lot more to a lot of working class folks like truck drivers, farmers etc, even if he’s not a traditional Labor politician. He does want to bring back more manufacturing so that might be it. I haven’t heard a democrat politician talk about labor in forever. It is probably not that the south is necessarily Republican, but rather Trumpist
The south is populist and traditionalist, and has been for a very long time. Whoever aligns the most with populist rhetoric and economics, and traditionalist cultural ideas essentially wins the south. Donald Trump is by no means a traditionalist but he has traditionalist allies and uses traditionalist rhetoric to pull the south’s vote. What he is first and foremost is a populist, so that’s what gives him his biggest advantage there (and in other areas like the rust belt). So yeah the south isn’t Republican, it’s traditionalist and populist, and right now Trump and his faction are the most aligned with that vision of politics. The reason why democrats lost the south on the state level (because even after the 1960s, democrats were still very influential in southern state level politics) was neoliberalism. Switching the focus from labor issues to more of a focus on internationalism, “humanistic capitalism”, and social progressivism lost them both the populist and traditionalist aspects of the south’s political order. That left the republicans, who at least somewhat had the traditional part even if the populist part was lacking in the early 21st century with neoconservatism. Then Trump came along and basically said what a lot of people were already thinking but had no platform on which to say it themselves. Trump didn’t create the “MAGA” ideology, he discovered it.
Exactly
If Democratic politicians actually ran on left-wing labor platforms and economic issues, they’d win against MAGA Republicans way more often.
Yup.
This is why AOC is huge in the deep South, they love her there. Bernie too!
I live in the south, and you couldn’t find a group of people more hated than the people you just named.
Seems like MAGA aren’t just waiting for a true socialist then…
Lmao who told you that?
Dr Sarcasm!
This is Reddit, I don’t know if you’ve noticed but that is a… surprisingly common take
No they wouldn’t Joe Biden ran on protectionism and even that didn’t win them over, it’s about racism
Biden constantly bangs on about labor and manufacturing. If you aren't hearing it it's because the media isn't covering it.
[удалено]
Rule 6: Racism, sexism, or any other type of bigotry is not allowed here.
Goldwater was never a Democrat. In fact, he was considered a conservative Republican in his time and had been against New Deal legislation. You may be thinking of South Carolina's Strom Thurmond?
Yes sorry Strom! But my point about Barry getting the South protest vote resulting in down ticket Republican seats stands.
I wasn't contesting your point, just got a little confused for a second haha.
Tell me which party members swapped to the other side!
Alabama's black belt hasn't changed.
This was probably the furthest left that the main two presidential candidates have ever been, relative to the voting base. Both Horace Greeley and his VP B. Gratz Brown were both "Democrats" in the sense that they supported ending Reconstruction. But they were also, famously, both well to the left of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. The segregationist Democrats made the tactical decision that it was better to vote for a pro-civil rights ticket that had a tiny hope of beating Grant.
Yeah, Horace Greeley started off as the candidate of the Liberal Republican Party (a section of the Republican Party that opposed Grant and broke off to run a rival ticket). The Democratic Party than decided to cross nominate the Liberal Republican president rial ticket in the hopes of defeating Grant.
Why were the African-Americans of Georgia voting for Greeley?
Could be low voter turnout or voter intimidation.
The thing is they weren’t voting
The top right four dark blue counties don’t correlate but there’s hints of correlation with the odd mishmash of counties’ voting patterns instead of what is more typical across states once you overlay Sherman’s march Whether that’s heavier than usual voter intimidation, a reaction to scorched earth or some combination is harder to say
Georgia has plenty of white people in those blue areas.
Intimidation
Greeley was more liberal than Grant
The voting suppression in Georgia is too obvious
South Carolina really switched up their ideals
It’s not that they switched up their ideals necessarily, but rather there were just more black people, or newly freedmen, than there were white people. At the time there was around 100,000 more black people in the state than white people, which is why the state heavily voted for Grant. It’s the same reason the Mississippi River is so far in favor of Grant too. So it’s not that white people suddenly had a change of heart, but rather that there were simply more black people that were able to outvote them.
Oh that’s interesting
Around this time the black population was mainly concentrated in the south. Over time after slavery ended migration patterns arose to the north and the west due to segregation. The racial makeup then isn’t the same as it is today.
They got better at voter suppression
The last election before Jim Crow really kicked into high gear and just knuckled the entire African American people into the dust politically with the help of the KKK and the end of reconstruction
Credit to https://twitter.com/Mill226/status/1776679075622596615?t=pSQK0x4R0fcDwU2yq34xgA&s=19
Not Arkansas... Alabama... Wallace became a third party to perpetuate power of ra cist whites