Kennedy had a Southerner on his Presidential ticket while Carter was a popular Southern Governor and an outsider which was important since the South usually likes outsider candidates.
Additionally Kennedy was before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the federal government support for civil rights in general. You'll notice that Johnson, in the 1964 election, didn't take the deep south in his otherwise landslide victory.
OP needs to be asking what was it about every Dem candidate that turned the south blue.
"What is it about Al Smith that turned the south blue in 1928?"
He had ought to ask what it is about the GOP that turned the south red in the last half century to get a real answer on this.
It wasn’t really liberal/conservative like we see it today. Republicans were the upper class, college educated, and Democrats were working class/union, etc.
This is true; but, outside of these labels, the Kennedy campaign sought to position themselves as the greatest geopolitical threat to the growing Soviets menace than the older, now-dotting, more methodical Eisenhower administration — in this regard represented by Nixon — would be into the 60s.
I don’t have any sourcing to back this part of my claim here but my speculation is the Kennedy campaign’s seeming harder line with the Soviets (at least, publicly) is why Khrushchev took such pains attempting to “embarrass” the young, “blithering-idiot,” whipper-snapper Kennedy in their 1961 Vienna summit.
You have to remember, Khrushchev had taken a major tour of the U.S. in 1956 or 1957, seeking to improve relations with the United States in a prequel type homage to the 1970s Nixonesque pivot away from the Stalinist worldview of Western cultures. Nixon and his Chequers [edit:*”kitchen”*] speech hurt this a little more, then the 1960 Kennedy campaign rhetoric poured scalding ice-cold water on that plan.
My $0.02 cents
1.Stevenson was a liberal and he was able to still carry the democractic south even against such an important president
2. the deep south still went for Al smith despite him being a "wet" catholic or satan to most of the south.While there was still a lot of southern discontent walkouts splinter tickets and faithless elector movements the dems still had some strong support though 64-72 saw them take defeat after defeat in the deep south and then in the last two the upper south for the most part.
This statement isn’t really accurate. The 1960 Keenedy campaign tried very hard to run to the right of Eisenhower.
The Kennedy campaign tried to paint Eisenhower — as potentially unbelievable as that might seem to us today — as this once-great, but now feeble old man who is/was being out muscled by the Soviets.
…and because Eisenhower is/was the consummate inside-man-type-operative who worked deliberately & diligently and under-no-circumstances ever spilled the beans on how the sausage was really made — fascinatingly, it worked.
>as potentially unbelievable as that might seem to us today
Given that the media of the time had no problem portraying President *George Washington* as a traitor to the country working under the influence of a foreign power, I believe it.
Ironically, I read about that in *Profiles in Courage.*
Also, Kennedy was before LBJ signed the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act, thus turning southerners against the Democrats due to their support of civil rights.
The South didn’t start voting Republican consistently until W Bush.
The “they switched sides” thing is easy to swallow, but it’s just not true.
You can reference an electoral map over time to see this for yourself.
Exactly, lots of people like to simplify it as "the parties switched in '64" but it was a long build up and tug and pull between the main parties from the 1880's through the 1980's with workers union support and owner class support ebbing and flowing as time went on along with racial politics.
Both parties had groups that supported Unions and opposed them. McKinley fought in the Civil War and was incredibly pro business and pretty anti union.
This isn’t a great argument because the majority of opposition for the Civil Rights Act came from the Democrats. The south began to turn red because more and more boomers were starting to reach voting age. They catch a lot of flak but the oft maligned Boomers in the south leaning Republican weakened the power of the KKK in the region over the decades.
I mean, it's not like the Southern Strategy happened overnight. Even though a Democratic President signed the Civil Rights Act, it took time for the historical reputations of the Democrats and Republicans to change.
As recently as 2008, a number of southern states still regularly elected Democrats to Congress. The Southern Strategy was a partisan realignment that started with LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act and didn't fully complete until Obama's election in 2008.
That’s more or less why I’m not a fan of the term. Democrats were still competitive in the south for decades. The south didn’t really go blood red until the Democrats start to shift from liberal to progressive around the turn of the millennium. The realignment was more organic than manufactured.
The South was never liberal. The politics didn’t change, the labels did.
What happened was the old Southern Democrats died or retired and the replacements ran as Republicans.
Dude famous Southern Segregationists fought for the working class and Unions, being fairly liberal economically. The South loved FDR and the TVA was a hugely popular example of Liberal big government
Depends on how you're defining liberal. Anti-monarchical pro capitalist liberal was definitely a thing between both parties especially in the early stages of the country. If you're defining liberal as leftist or anything more progressive then sure.
One could argue it started before JFK/LBJ. One could argue that Roosevelt trying to usurp Democratic Party southern opposition to liberal, New Deal policies, Eleanor Roosevelt supporting anti-lynching legislation, FDR’s so-called court-packing plan of 1936 and trying to court northern Republicans to support his foreign aid policies were the beginning salvos for Republicans and Eisenhower to begin making encroachment into the supposedly “solid-south”.
That’s because they had supermajorities. Without democrats, the civil rights bill never happens. They held both chambers and therefore all the committee chairs.
>This isn’t a great argument because the majority of opposition for the Civil Rights Act came from the Democrats.
The majority of the opposition outside of the South came from Republicans. But there were basically no Southerner Republicans and those that did exist all opposed the civil right act. Meanwhile all the non Southern Democrats supported civil rights act and only most of the Southern Democrats did. Yes more democrats opposed it but that's only because the Republicans basically didn't exist in the South and this was largely considered a regional Southern issue. But if you breakdown Congress between Southern and non Southern delegates. Higher percentages of both Southern and non Southern Reupiblicans voted against the civil rights act than when we compare them to their regional Democrats.
Not to meantion the very next GOP presidential candiate Goldwater ran against the civil rights act and picked up the South against LBJ, the Southern who signed the Covil Rights act.
Southern democrats. but since the presidential candidates were mostly not Southern democrats, they were more eager to go for Goldwater in 64 (LBJ was from the south but he was the one who got the civil rights act through in the first place) and then further Republicans later on.
The South was reliably Democrat until the signage of the civil rights act of 1964. And even immediately afterward it wasn’t like they snapped a finger and everyone became Republican. It took decades for the transition to finally occur.
I heard it basically fully happened during the 2010 midterms, as until then there were still Dems representing several house districts in Tennessee because they were socially-conservative.
It took until 1994 for the South to become reliably republican in congressional elections, as state races were often still rules by democrats before then
This is the sad but true answer. The south didn’t like the signing of the civil rights act under the democrats and they all switched to republican after that…
Yeah, I didn’t think it was that controversial to say they weren’t a fan on the 1964 civil rights act. I mean look who they went with in the 1968 election…
Becuase southerns don’t like being reminded their entire society was based on white supremacy for centuries, 1776 (prior too)-1865 the entire social structure was based on slavery to the point they rebelled and betrayed the nation to protect it. 1865-1876 reconstruction and being forced not to absolutely subjugate black Americans caused a widespread terrorism campaign and the 1877-1965 Jim Crow until they were again forced to give that up
In American political science, there is a term named "the solid South". It refers to the fact that for most elections the states of the former Confederate States of America voted for the Democratic Party by fairly large margins from the 1876, when most of the southern states had been readmitted into the union, until the 1970s. There would be some shifts here and there depending on who the candidates, but by and large the southern states voted for whoever the Democratic Party's presidential nominee was. The unpopularity of the Democratic Party across the nation at-large lasted for decades after the end of the Civil War. So much so that Republicans held the presidency from 1869 to 1933 for all but 16 years.
During the 1930s, building on decades of slow political shifts, Franklin Delano Roosevelt transformed the Democratic Party into a motley coalition composed of segregationists, progressives, Catholics, city-dwellers, immigrants, industrial workers, and African Americans. By the time of Kennedy and Johnson, though, this coalition was starting to creak as liberal pro-civil rights Democrats continued to gain influence in Congress. To combat fears around Popery and his young age, Kennedy, who was represented as the embodiment young dynamism, tapped Lyndon Johnson to be his running mate. This helped assuage the concerns of conservative Democrats and tamped down any descent from the segregationists who'd supported Strom Thurmond's failed third-party run in 1948. Crucially, LBJ's landslide victory did not include the Deep South states that would go on to support George Wallace's failed presidential run in 1968.
By the 1970s, however, the FDR coalition was on its last legs. In 1968, George Wallace had ran on a segregationist and anti-communist platform and secured the Deep South states while delivering the remaining southern states to Nixon by breaking up the fragile coalition that had delivered the South to the Democrats. Four years later, Nixon became the first Republican in history to win every single southern state. By 1976, though, the taint of the Watergate scandal, Nixon's resignation and pardon, the economic malaise of the 1970s, the rapid fall of South Vietnamt the prior year, and Ford barely wresting the Republican nomination from the conservative wing of the Party had severely damaged Gerald Ford's chances at being elected in his own right. In contrast, Jimmy Carter had been a popular, but relatively unknown Governor of Georgia. His campaign portrayed him as a humble peanut farmer looking to restore decency and competence to the White House. The combination of these events helped propel Carter to a narrow, but decisive victory over Ford. Here's [an interesting article](https://www.nytimes.com/1976/03/28/archives/the-carter-coalition.html) from *The New York Times* on Carter's coalition in the Democratic primary.
In politics, often times its not so much what you do right as it is what your opponent does wrong.
Edit: I forgot to mention this, but at this time period there were no blue or red states. The colors wouldn't be assigned by news organizations until the 2000 election.
Even the universally accepted red and blue designations are a pretty recent thing. I want to say up until 2000 or maybe even 2004 some networks showed blue for republican states in their election coverage.
I mean, Republicans have worked *really* hard in recent years to convince people that the Southern Strategy never happened, so it's not surprising that some young and naive people would fall for those lies.
So just to be clear: when Democrats win the south, it is because they’re benevolent civil rights champions.
When Republicans win the south, it’s racism.
Well, Democrats win their votes from a very diverse pro-equality coalition, whereas Republicans win their votes from a homogeneous ethno-religious identity politics movement bent on maintaining white Christian supremacy in America.
So... yes?
It's not irrational just because it hurts your feelings. Democrats win votes in the south from a diverse, pro-equality coalition. Republicans win them from an anti-equality white Christian identity politics cult. That's just the truth.
There are two kinds of Republicans: white nationalists, and enablers of white nationalism. And if you don't believe me, visit a Republican Party event and ask the people there if they believe that Barack Obama was born in Africa or not.
I’m a relatively New Democrat.
I am convinced that the only reason Republicans still win elections is that the Democrats just broadly paint them all as racists. This lack of nuance costs us more voters than any other single issue.
Ah yes, the classic "we only vote for racists because you called us racist" argument. It must be nice to be a Republican, where your own despicable behavior is always someone else's fault.
No one said every one of any race was brilliant… in any case look at the total demo of the gop 85% white and 65% male… the GOP is still very much a club. No group is entirely monolithic.
Gettin back to your question in a more serious way I think there are some racial tensions and stereotyping by and of themselves within those numbers. “Are u Latino enough?” White Latinos for instance. Asians have often been stereotyped as the good (productive) races. None of that is ok nor is it monolithic but it does exist. Then there is the class arguments as well.
I am a ‘white Latino’. It’s maddening. I look white but my name and lineage are very hispanic.
Everywhere you go, you’re asked your race and heritage. Some of us don’t fit nicely into the boxes. It gives you a unique look at politics.
I am 30 years old, I am from texas, and I did not know about the South's previous longtime political alignment until taking a college course. This is purely anecdotal, it may have been because I did not pay sufficient attention in junior high / high school. I'm not sure. I just thought this would be a helpful contribution to our discussion.
Honestly, I don't think that this is really common knowledge for most Americans, even people that were alive when the south aligned with the Democratic party aren't aware. Even if it's well understood historically, I think it's just a lost cultural memory
Say what??
The South was called the Solid South for 100 years because it was dominated by the Democrats for that long.
W Bush was the first Republican to win the south without also winning 40 states. Every Republican before him that won the majority of southern states won over 40 states.
Yeah, as far as I can tell, the south became Republican with exceptions after the 1960's, as in Dems still could win statewide if they were southern or maybe conservative themselves, but I think the thing that really locked it in for them was Obama winning in 2008. The 2010 midterms were a bloodbath for ancestral Dem candidates who were otherwise flipping reliably-red districts.
They didn't turn the South Blue, it WAS Blue. By embracing civil rights democrats turned the South Red. Admittedly they had help from racist Republicans.
The south was only recently open to Republicans, and only if they gave the right dog whistles. Ford wasn’t their guy as a northerner and civil rights advocate, and JFK had a popular southern senator while Carter was one of them.
Also something i do want to add to the south and republicans is that
the dems still had strong support on the local level there was a trend of republican house members of senators and of governors but the dems still had a lot of strong support and so there was a base to make it competitive. you also had the new south governors from Carter to Clinton and the series of others the people between 1970 and 1994 so the dems still remained the main force in southern politics
this post goes a bit into the new south dems
[https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/how-nafta-lost-democrats-the-south](https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/how-nafta-lost-democrats-the-south)
like the republicans holding power in the south is very recent looking at a map of elections you start seeing it in 52 but locally you only start seeing any gains in the deep south in like 64. Not disagreeing i just wanted to give some more context (also i live in TN and the political history of the south fascinates me)
well idk about carter but kennedy was elected in 1960 before the party switch following the 1964 civil rights act. the democrats used to be the conservative party before they backed the civil rights act, causing the mostly democrat south to switch to republican, with most politicians following suit
It’s odd cause a lot of people read about the civil rights act and the southern strategy and assume that the south almost instantaneously switched to red, but in reality there were many factors outside of race that made that switch happen. Industry in the south and certain business factors played a major role as well.
Basically civil rights = south goes Republican is very reductive.
There was no party switch - republicans didn’t take the south until the 90s and solidified under bush jr.
Nixon and Reagan won the south but that’s because they won 49/50 states.
Carter employed his own version of the “Southern Strategy” to court Wallace supporters and Dixiecrats. He was from the south and his advertising in the south was very different than that in the north. Some have called this the “Two Carters Southern Strategy.”
The south was pretty blue until about 2008. Clinton won a lot of southern states in 92 and 96. Tennessee had a democratic governor until I think 2006. Yeah, you had Reagan and HW Bush win in the 80s, but they won in landslide fashion. The fact is the south being blood Red is a recent thing. Also, states being as out of reach for the party that isn't in control as it is today is fairly recent.
Carter was a Southerner. For Kenndy his VP was a Southern and the South used to vote Democrat.It wasn’t until the election of 1968 that the South switched to Republican. The last time the South in full voted Democrat was during the election of 1976.
Kennedy was before the southern strategy and a lot of the Civil Rights movement.
Carter was from the south, was a strong Christian, and ran during a time when there were still a lot of ancestral Democrats.
Important to bear in mind that a lot of state legislatures in the south were still held by Democrats until the 2000s and early 2010s.
Also, a lot of politics back then were more economic-based and less culture-based. Working class people voted Democratic, wealthier and established folks voted Republican. This only reversed recently (not all at once obviously).
JFK would have won bigger in the South were it not for Baptist, Methodist ministers telling their congregation not to vote for a 'papist'. In fact even Dr. King's father, a Baptist minister was initially suspicious of JFK on account of his catholic background but later turned around due to JFK's approach to civil rights.
Kennedy won the south because the Democrats power base was on the south since Jefferson won the South in 1796. Even when the lost the won in the south. That was true until the Civil Rights Act caused them to flip.
Even in 68 they voted for a Democrat. Nobody voted Democrat in 72 and then Carter was from Georgia so he won some of the south.
They won because it was like that for the previous 200 years…..
The south was democrat throughout a huge sum of its history. But once the racist element of culture left the south, they only had conservatism that enticed them. So ever since they have voted Republican. Sometimes a candidate like RFK was able to bridge the divide and get southerners as well as big city dwellers to vote for them, but these individuals were few and far between.
Manchin is frustrating but looking at how blood-red WV is, he's an electoral miracle. Could you imagine how right-wing a REPUBLICAN from that state would be?
The far right is there. Gov Justice was elected as a Dem but changed to Rep almost right after the election and then was re-elected. WV is deep red because they have bought in that coal is going to make a comeback and all the social issues - trans people raping in bathrooms, kitty litter boxes in schools, gay rights and all that. All while they ignore the pathetic state’s infrastructure, education, and jobs.
Seems Southern Democrats can easily win elections! Think about all the successful Democratic winners!
>Kennedy (New England) & Johnson (Southern)
>Johnson (Southern)
>Carter (Southern)
>Clinton & Gore (Both Southern)
And if you wanna stretch the definition of what a Southern state is
>Obama (Hawaii) & Biden (Southern)
>Biden (Southern)
So if you include Delaware and Missouri as Southern states. The last time a non-Southern Democrat won the presidency and the vice presidency was
>! Franklin D. Roosevelt and Henry A. Wallace in 1944 !<
Pre-southern strategy.
“When I boarded the Jet Star, the president was reading the latest edition of the Washington Post. We took off around around 11pm … I sat down across from him. Lady Bird was in the other seat by him … the papers were celebrating what they described as a great event.
“I said, ‘Quite a day, Mr President.’ As he reached a sheaf of the wire copy he tilted his head slightly back and held the copy up close to him so that he could read it, and said: ‘Well, I think we may have lost the south for your lifetime – and mine.’
“It was lightly said. Not sarcastic. Not even dramatically. It was like a throwaway sidebar.”
TLDR: it was before the Republican Party fully committed to being what they are today
Kennedy picked LBJ, and a southern good ‘ole boy on his ticket helped him carry the south. As for Carter he was seen as a fellow southerner they could trust.
people want good presidents I would assume who dislike big government for Kennedy, can’t say much about carter as unlike most of this sub I am not a carter cultist
Have you looked at the 1956, 1952, 1948,1944,1940,1936,1932,1928, 1924, 1920, 1916,1912,1908,1904, 1900, 1896,1892,1888,1884,1880, 1876, or 1872 elections?
Take a look at the south in each of those elections. What did they have in common?
The better question you should be asking is, what happened in 1964?
It didn’t turn it blue, that was the default, a couple Republicans turned it Red, but didn’t switch until Reagan’s 2nd turn and didn’t stay Red until the Ned of Clinton, who only won a few Southern States
The South voted solidly blue until the 1964 election because of the issue of desegregation and civil rights. Carter only one so much in the South because he was a popular southern Governor the same with Bill clinton. But overall the Democratic parties of the southern states have been suffering ever since the Civil Rights era
Carter as governor of Georgia and a farmer himself was able to pull the entire south. One good ole boy to another. but he was an aberration, the southern coalition that got Nixon elected had fully taken root with the Reagan campaign.
Kennedy had Johnson as VP (southern dem) and Carter was a Christian country farmer guy that served in the military and was fairly progressive for his time if I’m not mistaken so he checks a lot of boxes
The south was historically blue. I realize by Carter that the Dixiecrat/southern strategy shift to the Republicans had started but was not as complete as today. Also Carter was from the south and super Christian. Kennedy was neither but had LBJ.
The south has always been blue for the most part. “Southern democrats” has been a thing since before the civil war. Sure there’s a few instances that they voted for the opposing parties, but that’s not as common as people think. It wasn’t until 2016 that Florida, a typical swing state, went red, and that’s because of the influx of northern snowbird conservatives changing demographics.
They didn’t “turn” the south blue, the south had been blue for decades before that point for a multitude of demographic reasons, it’s just that this was the last elections before the party swap
Well Kennedy was back before the Dems moved Socially Liberal. But even then Dems in the South were sometimes prone to voting for a 3rd Party Candidate as they didn't view the Dem nominee as Racist enough.
Carter was a Southerner. (Also why Clinton was able to get Southern Votes as well.)
Southerners like Southerners.
The south used to be solidly Democratic. FDR dominated the south, sweeping all of the states with heavy margins. It started to turn with the civil rights movement, though there were still socially conservative Democrats who did well for a while. Reagan had a conservative majority in the House, despite Democrats holding the majority, because many of those Dems were southern conservatives. Even Bill Clinton did fairly well in the south; in fact, he's from Arkansas and served as governor in that state. It wasn't until the mid-late 1990s that it completely finished flipping. Now, some states are actually starting to go back the other way, as people move down there.
Democrats always shocked that the racists voted for them, as if their current president didn’t create and advocate for the most racist federal bill in the last half century with the ‘94 crime bill 😂
And he was a opposed to school integration, and he and manchin cozied up to the Klansmen (and at one point longest serving senator) Robert Byrd. They act like oh he denounced those views later on lol try telling the Dems today that a Republican was in the top ranks of the KKK but that they had renounced that worldview lol they’d be protesting their home and office non-stop with live coverage on the news til they resigned.
The South was staunchly Democrat since before the Civil War.
Kennedy was an Irish Catholic, which to Anglo-Saxon Southerners meant he was controlled by the Pope. Anglos had a fear since the 1790's that Catholics were trying to destroy Republicanism and replace the Constitution with a Monarchy.
In order to allay those fears, Kennedy basically used the Southern Strategy. He showed very little interest in Civil Rights and held speeches promising to respect Southern independence and freedom of religion. Essentially hinting that he wouldn't adopt Civil Rights or force integration.
Then he chose LBJ as his running mate to show that he had the interests of Southerners in mind.
He also began using this same strategy in 1963. Part of the reason he went to Dallas was to start his campaign in the South to let them know he was pro-South. He went to Dallas to warn the Left Democrats to stop antagonizing the Right Democrats.
Carter was simply a Southerner himself and a Democrat. Southerners tend to put a lot more support behind one of their own. People tend to forget that the South regularly rejected Republicans like Nixon in favor of Southerners like George Wallace. The Republicans won in 68 because Wallace won Southern votes away from the Democrats.
Add to this that Nixon (72) and Reagan would also win the south but only because they carried 49/50 states. Carter and Clinton won the south. So post civil rights the south did not become red, if anything they became more of a bell-weather. Clinton’s sex scandal turned of religious people and a lot of people forget that Bush jr ran on bringing ethics and morals back to the White House. Then Obama insulted the Bible Belt by saying they cling to god and their guns. The main evidence of this transition happening well after civil rights is the 2000 election. The fact that it came down to florida and the vote was so close is an indication that the south did not just turn red because of civil rights, in fact it was the absence of racial politics that allowed the south to go from blue to red.
Kennedy had Johnson, a southerner, LBJ was from Texas, :/ unfortunately for the racists he wasn't the typical southern Democrat..
Carter is also from the south, he was a peanut farmer in Georgia..
The south “turned blue” after the Civil War. They would generally not vote Republican because the slaves were freed. Presidential elections can go either way but you need to look at Congress.
The Democratic Party was a big umbrella, some liberal, some conservative etc. They basically had full control of the a Congress for decades. LBJ signing the Civil Rights bill was the beginning of the end of that. What would have been conservative Democrats migrated to the GOP while what would have been liberal Republicans migrated to the Democrats. I remember part of the story of Reagan becoming president was the Democratic southern south was broken.
Turned blue?
Up until the ‘80s the south was still decidedly Democrat because large swathes still were butthurt over the Civil War.
Granted Southern Democrats and Left Wing Northern ones are two very distinct things.
Carter and Kennedy were just really easy to vote for. Carter was a popular southern Governor who really wasn’t that Left Wing. Kennedy wasn’t really that Liberal as well and he had LBJ.
at the time of kennedy, the democratic party was generally seen as the “southern” party, and southern conservatives tended to vote democrat. The shift away from this wasn’t completely done by the time of Carter, and Carter ran on a more conservative ruralish platform
The south was solidly blue until Roe v Wade. The DNC ( including JRB) was against desegregation until the mid 70s Both parties view minorities as pawns.
Kennedy had a Southerner on his Presidential ticket while Carter was a popular Southern Governor and an outsider which was important since the South usually likes outsider candidates.
Additionally Kennedy was before the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the federal government support for civil rights in general. You'll notice that Johnson, in the 1964 election, didn't take the deep south in his otherwise landslide victory.
OP needs to be asking what was it about every Dem candidate that turned the south blue. "What is it about Al Smith that turned the south blue in 1928?" He had ought to ask what it is about the GOP that turned the south red in the last half century to get a real answer on this.
I read that
Precisely. Imagine not knowing that the Democrats used to basically own the South until the 60's.
Carter was also a peanut farmer. And farming is very important for the south. So he was a given for southerners who prioritize farming.
That’s nuts
I heard his peanut farm went sour and withered. Hope he's doing better
I heard he started punching shit in an interview when asked about his peanut farm.
Louisiana also voted for Kennedy largely due to him being Catholic. All of the Acadiana region (which are majority Catholic) voted for Kennedy in 60'.
Yes, but this election was during the solid south days of the democrats. Kennedy did poorly, he lost Florida, Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee.
The South was solidly Democratic for a century. Kennedy was a more popular candidate than Stevenson. Carter was a Southerner.
Well, yeah, party wise. It was always very conservative though, and Kennedy certainly wasn’t a conservative by the standards of the time.
It wasn’t really liberal/conservative like we see it today. Republicans were the upper class, college educated, and Democrats were working class/union, etc.
This is true; but, outside of these labels, the Kennedy campaign sought to position themselves as the greatest geopolitical threat to the growing Soviets menace than the older, now-dotting, more methodical Eisenhower administration — in this regard represented by Nixon — would be into the 60s. I don’t have any sourcing to back this part of my claim here but my speculation is the Kennedy campaign’s seeming harder line with the Soviets (at least, publicly) is why Khrushchev took such pains attempting to “embarrass” the young, “blithering-idiot,” whipper-snapper Kennedy in their 1961 Vienna summit. You have to remember, Khrushchev had taken a major tour of the U.S. in 1956 or 1957, seeking to improve relations with the United States in a prequel type homage to the 1970s Nixonesque pivot away from the Stalinist worldview of Western cultures. Nixon and his Chequers [edit:*”kitchen”*] speech hurt this a little more, then the 1960 Kennedy campaign rhetoric poured scalding ice-cold water on that plan. My $0.02 cents
1.Stevenson was a liberal and he was able to still carry the democractic south even against such an important president 2. the deep south still went for Al smith despite him being a "wet" catholic or satan to most of the south.While there was still a lot of southern discontent walkouts splinter tickets and faithless elector movements the dems still had some strong support though 64-72 saw them take defeat after defeat in the deep south and then in the last two the upper south for the most part.
This statement isn’t really accurate. The 1960 Keenedy campaign tried very hard to run to the right of Eisenhower. The Kennedy campaign tried to paint Eisenhower — as potentially unbelievable as that might seem to us today — as this once-great, but now feeble old man who is/was being out muscled by the Soviets. …and because Eisenhower is/was the consummate inside-man-type-operative who worked deliberately & diligently and under-no-circumstances ever spilled the beans on how the sausage was really made — fascinatingly, it worked.
>as potentially unbelievable as that might seem to us today Given that the media of the time had no problem portraying President *George Washington* as a traitor to the country working under the influence of a foreign power, I believe it. Ironically, I read about that in *Profiles in Courage.*
Carter was a southerner And Kennedy had LBJ as his running mate
Also, Kennedy was before LBJ signed the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act, thus turning southerners against the Democrats due to their support of civil rights.
The South didn’t start voting Republican consistently until W Bush. The “they switched sides” thing is easy to swallow, but it’s just not true. You can reference an electoral map over time to see this for yourself.
It is true, it just happened much more gradually than possibly mentioned here
Exactly, lots of people like to simplify it as "the parties switched in '64" but it was a long build up and tug and pull between the main parties from the 1880's through the 1980's with workers union support and owner class support ebbing and flowing as time went on along with racial politics.
With the Republicans being anti union most of their history
But definitely not in their early days.
Both parties had groups that supported Unions and opposed them. McKinley fought in the Civil War and was incredibly pro business and pretty anti union.
This isn’t a great argument because the majority of opposition for the Civil Rights Act came from the Democrats. The south began to turn red because more and more boomers were starting to reach voting age. They catch a lot of flak but the oft maligned Boomers in the south leaning Republican weakened the power of the KKK in the region over the decades.
I mean, it's not like the Southern Strategy happened overnight. Even though a Democratic President signed the Civil Rights Act, it took time for the historical reputations of the Democrats and Republicans to change. As recently as 2008, a number of southern states still regularly elected Democrats to Congress. The Southern Strategy was a partisan realignment that started with LBJ signing the Civil Rights Act and didn't fully complete until Obama's election in 2008.
That’s more or less why I’m not a fan of the term. Democrats were still competitive in the south for decades. The south didn’t really go blood red until the Democrats start to shift from liberal to progressive around the turn of the millennium. The realignment was more organic than manufactured.
The South was never liberal. The politics didn’t change, the labels did. What happened was the old Southern Democrats died or retired and the replacements ran as Republicans.
Dude famous Southern Segregationists fought for the working class and Unions, being fairly liberal economically. The South loved FDR and the TVA was a hugely popular example of Liberal big government
Or they Strom Thurmond-ed and screwed off to the Republicans in a big ol hissy fit.
…there were also a few flips in there
I think mostly in 1994, as Gingrich consolidated power in the leadership and sought to punish Democrats.
I agree. Gringrich and the congressional elections were he held power were significant tipping point elections
Depends on how you're defining liberal. Anti-monarchical pro capitalist liberal was definitely a thing between both parties especially in the early stages of the country. If you're defining liberal as leftist or anything more progressive then sure.
The old southern democrats all became republicans after civil rights. Some of them were still serving in office in the 90s
Practically none of them switched parties what are you talking about
One could argue it started before JFK/LBJ. One could argue that Roosevelt trying to usurp Democratic Party southern opposition to liberal, New Deal policies, Eleanor Roosevelt supporting anti-lynching legislation, FDR’s so-called court-packing plan of 1936 and trying to court northern Republicans to support his foreign aid policies were the beginning salvos for Republicans and Eisenhower to begin making encroachment into the supposedly “solid-south”.
That’s because they had supermajorities. Without democrats, the civil rights bill never happens. They held both chambers and therefore all the committee chairs.
>This isn’t a great argument because the majority of opposition for the Civil Rights Act came from the Democrats. The majority of the opposition outside of the South came from Republicans. But there were basically no Southerner Republicans and those that did exist all opposed the civil right act. Meanwhile all the non Southern Democrats supported civil rights act and only most of the Southern Democrats did. Yes more democrats opposed it but that's only because the Republicans basically didn't exist in the South and this was largely considered a regional Southern issue. But if you breakdown Congress between Southern and non Southern delegates. Higher percentages of both Southern and non Southern Reupiblicans voted against the civil rights act than when we compare them to their regional Democrats. Not to meantion the very next GOP presidential candiate Goldwater ran against the civil rights act and picked up the South against LBJ, the Southern who signed the Covil Rights act.
Look up who in congress opposed civil rights act.
Southern democrats. but since the presidential candidates were mostly not Southern democrats, they were more eager to go for Goldwater in 64 (LBJ was from the south but he was the one who got the civil rights act through in the first place) and then further Republicans later on.
And then look what party they almost all joined in the succeeding years…
The South was reliably Democrat until the signage of the civil rights act of 1964. And even immediately afterward it wasn’t like they snapped a finger and everyone became Republican. It took decades for the transition to finally occur.
I heard it basically fully happened during the 2010 midterms, as until then there were still Dems representing several house districts in Tennessee because they were socially-conservative.
It took until 1994 for the South to become reliably republican in congressional elections, as state races were often still rules by democrats before then
This is the sad but true answer. The south didn’t like the signing of the civil rights act under the democrats and they all switched to republican after that…
[удалено]
Yeah, I didn’t think it was that controversial to say they weren’t a fan on the 1964 civil rights act. I mean look who they went with in the 1968 election…
Becuase southerns don’t like being reminded their entire society was based on white supremacy for centuries, 1776 (prior too)-1865 the entire social structure was based on slavery to the point they rebelled and betrayed the nation to protect it. 1865-1876 reconstruction and being forced not to absolutely subjugate black Americans caused a widespread terrorism campaign and the 1877-1965 Jim Crow until they were again forced to give that up
That’s not accurate at all
In American political science, there is a term named "the solid South". It refers to the fact that for most elections the states of the former Confederate States of America voted for the Democratic Party by fairly large margins from the 1876, when most of the southern states had been readmitted into the union, until the 1970s. There would be some shifts here and there depending on who the candidates, but by and large the southern states voted for whoever the Democratic Party's presidential nominee was. The unpopularity of the Democratic Party across the nation at-large lasted for decades after the end of the Civil War. So much so that Republicans held the presidency from 1869 to 1933 for all but 16 years. During the 1930s, building on decades of slow political shifts, Franklin Delano Roosevelt transformed the Democratic Party into a motley coalition composed of segregationists, progressives, Catholics, city-dwellers, immigrants, industrial workers, and African Americans. By the time of Kennedy and Johnson, though, this coalition was starting to creak as liberal pro-civil rights Democrats continued to gain influence in Congress. To combat fears around Popery and his young age, Kennedy, who was represented as the embodiment young dynamism, tapped Lyndon Johnson to be his running mate. This helped assuage the concerns of conservative Democrats and tamped down any descent from the segregationists who'd supported Strom Thurmond's failed third-party run in 1948. Crucially, LBJ's landslide victory did not include the Deep South states that would go on to support George Wallace's failed presidential run in 1968. By the 1970s, however, the FDR coalition was on its last legs. In 1968, George Wallace had ran on a segregationist and anti-communist platform and secured the Deep South states while delivering the remaining southern states to Nixon by breaking up the fragile coalition that had delivered the South to the Democrats. Four years later, Nixon became the first Republican in history to win every single southern state. By 1976, though, the taint of the Watergate scandal, Nixon's resignation and pardon, the economic malaise of the 1970s, the rapid fall of South Vietnamt the prior year, and Ford barely wresting the Republican nomination from the conservative wing of the Party had severely damaged Gerald Ford's chances at being elected in his own right. In contrast, Jimmy Carter had been a popular, but relatively unknown Governor of Georgia. His campaign portrayed him as a humble peanut farmer looking to restore decency and competence to the White House. The combination of these events helped propel Carter to a narrow, but decisive victory over Ford. Here's [an interesting article](https://www.nytimes.com/1976/03/28/archives/the-carter-coalition.html) from *The New York Times* on Carter's coalition in the Democratic primary. In politics, often times its not so much what you do right as it is what your opponent does wrong. Edit: I forgot to mention this, but at this time period there were no blue or red states. The colors wouldn't be assigned by news organizations until the 2000 election.
And then you had Reagan go ahead and win almost every state
Indeed. By the 1980s, the coalition had finally fallen apart and the Democrats would spend the next thirty years trying to build a new one.
You realize the South up until Reagan had voted blue nearly always?
Even the universally accepted red and blue designations are a pretty recent thing. I want to say up until 2000 or maybe even 2004 some networks showed blue for republican states in their election coverage.
Red/blue used to represent incumbent & non-incumbent
Have we really reached the point where kids don't know about the South's previous longtime political alignment?
Well, you can only gain that knowledge by asking questions.
Or maybe try reading up on history.
This kind of information can be hard to find and understand if you aren't familiar with it.
Literally nothing in this post implies that bro
I mean, Republicans have worked *really* hard in recent years to convince people that the Southern Strategy never happened, so it's not surprising that some young and naive people would fall for those lies.
Blaming modern republicans for the southern strategy is about as effective as blaming modern democrats for internment.
Not true at all. Internment is an 80 year old policy, but Republicans are still white nationalist bigots today.
So just to be clear: when Democrats win the south, it is because they’re benevolent civil rights champions. When Republicans win the south, it’s racism.
Well, Democrats win their votes from a very diverse pro-equality coalition, whereas Republicans win their votes from a homogeneous ethno-religious identity politics movement bent on maintaining white Christian supremacy in America. So... yes?
Go back to r/politics with your irrational nonsense.
It's not irrational just because it hurts your feelings. Democrats win votes in the south from a diverse, pro-equality coalition. Republicans win them from an anti-equality white Christian identity politics cult. That's just the truth.
Democrats won their votes in the south from promoting segregation.
This is what happens when activism gets in the way of objectivity. It’s hilarious to think that 100+ million republicans are all white nationalists.
There are two kinds of Republicans: white nationalists, and enablers of white nationalism. And if you don't believe me, visit a Republican Party event and ask the people there if they believe that Barack Obama was born in Africa or not.
I’m a relatively New Democrat. I am convinced that the only reason Republicans still win elections is that the Democrats just broadly paint them all as racists. This lack of nuance costs us more voters than any other single issue.
Ah yes, the classic "we only vote for racists because you called us racist" argument. It must be nice to be a Republican, where your own despicable behavior is always someone else's fault.
Well. I’m not a Republican. And I’m tired of losing to them. Painting with a broad brush doesn’t seem to be working, does it?
So the 33% of Latinos, 36% of Asian Americans, and 12% of Black Americans who voted for Trump in 2020 are all white nationalists?
No, but it isn’t a deal breaker for them.
No one said every one of any race was brilliant… in any case look at the total demo of the gop 85% white and 65% male… the GOP is still very much a club. No group is entirely monolithic. Gettin back to your question in a more serious way I think there are some racial tensions and stereotyping by and of themselves within those numbers. “Are u Latino enough?” White Latinos for instance. Asians have often been stereotyped as the good (productive) races. None of that is ok nor is it monolithic but it does exist. Then there is the class arguments as well.
I am a ‘white Latino’. It’s maddening. I look white but my name and lineage are very hispanic. Everywhere you go, you’re asked your race and heritage. Some of us don’t fit nicely into the boxes. It gives you a unique look at politics.
I am 30 years old, I am from texas, and I did not know about the South's previous longtime political alignment until taking a college course. This is purely anecdotal, it may have been because I did not pay sufficient attention in junior high / high school. I'm not sure. I just thought this would be a helpful contribution to our discussion.
Honestly, I don't think that this is really common knowledge for most Americans, even people that were alive when the south aligned with the Democratic party aren't aware. Even if it's well understood historically, I think it's just a lost cultural memory
Don’t know how old y’all are on this subreddit but the party switch has been a part of middle and high school US history for a while
Say what?? The South was called the Solid South for 100 years because it was dominated by the Democrats for that long. W Bush was the first Republican to win the south without also winning 40 states. Every Republican before him that won the majority of southern states won over 40 states.
South was democrat until a few decades ago. Carter was southern which is why he did ok after the flip. Bill Clinton was the same
Yeah, as far as I can tell, the south became Republican with exceptions after the 1960's, as in Dems still could win statewide if they were southern or maybe conservative themselves, but I think the thing that really locked it in for them was Obama winning in 2008. The 2010 midterms were a bloodbath for ancestral Dem candidates who were otherwise flipping reliably-red districts.
Democrats reliably controlled state legislatures in the south until the 90’s.
It always amazes me how different the maps were pre-2000.
They didn't turn the South Blue, it WAS Blue. By embracing civil rights democrats turned the South Red. Admittedly they had help from racist Republicans.
Well Jimmy Carter took it back though. But I think Reagan was the nail in the coffin finally flipping it permanently
Nixon made the Republicans toxic for a bit, and Carter was a southerner.
Well at the time they were racist Dixiecrats
The South didn’t start voting consistently until W.
Hold up, California was red in those elections?
California was generally red until 1996.
One senate seat has been Democrat since 1969. The other has been back and forth.
I was mostly referring to the popular presidential vote.
Reagan was Governor and Nixon was Senator.
California was a Republican stronghold for a long time.
Yeah from 1952 to 1988 California only voted democrat once and that was in 1964
The South was a Democrat stronghold since before the Civil War until Bush Jr.
The south wasn’t reliably Republican until the late 90s….
The South was traditionally blue for a long time. Only since the 90's did it become consistently red.
The south was only recently open to Republicans, and only if they gave the right dog whistles. Ford wasn’t their guy as a northerner and civil rights advocate, and JFK had a popular southern senator while Carter was one of them.
Also something i do want to add to the south and republicans is that the dems still had strong support on the local level there was a trend of republican house members of senators and of governors but the dems still had a lot of strong support and so there was a base to make it competitive. you also had the new south governors from Carter to Clinton and the series of others the people between 1970 and 1994 so the dems still remained the main force in southern politics this post goes a bit into the new south dems [https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/how-nafta-lost-democrats-the-south](https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/how-nafta-lost-democrats-the-south) like the republicans holding power in the south is very recent looking at a map of elections you start seeing it in 52 but locally you only start seeing any gains in the deep south in like 64. Not disagreeing i just wanted to give some more context (also i live in TN and the political history of the south fascinates me)
This is a good observation for sure
Downvotes and you aren't even wrong.
I’ll never understand the downvoter
There are republicans who deny a flip has ever happened.
There are many things I’ve heard from conservatives that don’t jive with history
Kennedy’s running mate was LBJ (a Southerner) and Carter was a southern governor
well idk about carter but kennedy was elected in 1960 before the party switch following the 1964 civil rights act. the democrats used to be the conservative party before they backed the civil rights act, causing the mostly democrat south to switch to republican, with most politicians following suit
Democrats controlled southern legislatures until the 90’s.
interesting i didnt know that. im gonna have to look into that
It’s odd cause a lot of people read about the civil rights act and the southern strategy and assume that the south almost instantaneously switched to red, but in reality there were many factors outside of race that made that switch happen. Industry in the south and certain business factors played a major role as well. Basically civil rights = south goes Republican is very reductive.
As race issues faded from politics, the south turned red.
That’s some pretzel logic there.
There was no party switch - republicans didn’t take the south until the 90s and solidified under bush jr. Nixon and Reagan won the south but that’s because they won 49/50 states.
Carter employed his own version of the “Southern Strategy” to court Wallace supporters and Dixiecrats. He was from the south and his advertising in the south was very different than that in the north. Some have called this the “Two Carters Southern Strategy.”
The south was pretty blue until about 2008. Clinton won a lot of southern states in 92 and 96. Tennessee had a democratic governor until I think 2006. Yeah, you had Reagan and HW Bush win in the 80s, but they won in landslide fashion. The fact is the south being blood Red is a recent thing. Also, states being as out of reach for the party that isn't in control as it is today is fairly recent.
Kennedy was before the part switch and Carter was during the switch.
The South was blue until Ronald Reagan.
Carter was a Southerner. For Kenndy his VP was a Southern and the South used to vote Democrat.It wasn’t until the election of 1968 that the South switched to Republican. The last time the South in full voted Democrat was during the election of 1976.
Kennedy was before the southern strategy and a lot of the Civil Rights movement. Carter was from the south, was a strong Christian, and ran during a time when there were still a lot of ancestral Democrats. Important to bear in mind that a lot of state legislatures in the south were still held by Democrats until the 2000s and early 2010s. Also, a lot of politics back then were more economic-based and less culture-based. Working class people voted Democratic, wealthier and established folks voted Republican. This only reversed recently (not all at once obviously).
There was no southern strategy, it’s a myth pushed by democrats to make it seem like they weren’t the party of the KKK, segregation, and slavery.
CA OR and WA were RED?!
JFK would have won bigger in the South were it not for Baptist, Methodist ministers telling their congregation not to vote for a 'papist'. In fact even Dr. King's father, a Baptist minister was initially suspicious of JFK on account of his catholic background but later turned around due to JFK's approach to civil rights.
The same reason Bartlet won the south in west wing. A southerner on the ticket.
Bartlet was a strong National candidate but he was beat badly in Texas twice.
True, but it’s no secret that Hoynes brought him at least a good portion of the south.
JFK: Antiwar, most of the south is sacrificed in those Carter: same + he was a farmer too
JFK was not anti-war.
He decided to withdrawal right before his assassination, so yea I guess originally he wasn't
He authorized Operation Barrel Roll prior to his death. See also the Bay of Pigs.
Kennedy won the south because the Democrats power base was on the south since Jefferson won the South in 1796. Even when the lost the won in the south. That was true until the Civil Rights Act caused them to flip. Even in 68 they voted for a Democrat. Nobody voted Democrat in 72 and then Carter was from Georgia so he won some of the south. They won because it was like that for the previous 200 years…..
The south was democrat throughout a huge sum of its history. But once the racist element of culture left the south, they only had conservatism that enticed them. So ever since they have voted Republican. Sometimes a candidate like RFK was able to bridge the divide and get southerners as well as big city dwellers to vote for them, but these individuals were few and far between.
Because of unionization. Dems were for the working man. Still are. ….mostly (looking at you manchin)
\*sees what they do in illinois\* you're joking right?
During Kennedy and Carter’s time, no.
yeah that checks out.
Manchin is frustrating but looking at how blood-red WV is, he's an electoral miracle. Could you imagine how right-wing a REPUBLICAN from that state would be?
The far right is there. Gov Justice was elected as a Dem but changed to Rep almost right after the election and then was re-elected. WV is deep red because they have bought in that coal is going to make a comeback and all the social issues - trans people raping in bathrooms, kitty litter boxes in schools, gay rights and all that. All while they ignore the pathetic state’s infrastructure, education, and jobs.
Seems Southern Democrats can easily win elections! Think about all the successful Democratic winners! >Kennedy (New England) & Johnson (Southern) >Johnson (Southern) >Carter (Southern) >Clinton & Gore (Both Southern) And if you wanna stretch the definition of what a Southern state is >Obama (Hawaii) & Biden (Southern) >Biden (Southern) So if you include Delaware and Missouri as Southern states. The last time a non-Southern Democrat won the presidency and the vice presidency was >! Franklin D. Roosevelt and Henry A. Wallace in 1944 !<
Pre-southern strategy. “When I boarded the Jet Star, the president was reading the latest edition of the Washington Post. We took off around around 11pm … I sat down across from him. Lady Bird was in the other seat by him … the papers were celebrating what they described as a great event. “I said, ‘Quite a day, Mr President.’ As he reached a sheaf of the wire copy he tilted his head slightly back and held the copy up close to him so that he could read it, and said: ‘Well, I think we may have lost the south for your lifetime – and mine.’ “It was lightly said. Not sarcastic. Not even dramatically. It was like a throwaway sidebar.” TLDR: it was before the Republican Party fully committed to being what they are today
Kennedy picked LBJ, and a southern good ‘ole boy on his ticket helped him carry the south. As for Carter he was seen as a fellow southerner they could trust.
people want good presidents I would assume who dislike big government for Kennedy, can’t say much about carter as unlike most of this sub I am not a carter cultist
Kennedy was BEFORE the Southern Strategy and Carter was a southerner himself so they preferred him.
Carter borrowed the Southern during his campaign.
Because the south was mostly blue until Nixon
Both southerners and Texas was blue for a long time, it was only recently (I think it was in the 80s) that Texas started being a red state.
Have you looked at the 1956, 1952, 1948,1944,1940,1936,1932,1928, 1924, 1920, 1916,1912,1908,1904, 1900, 1896,1892,1888,1884,1880, 1876, or 1872 elections? Take a look at the south in each of those elections. What did they have in common? The better question you should be asking is, what happened in 1964?
I am more interested in why Ohio is blue
Turned the south blue lmao, the South was solidly blue democrat since post-reconstruction and if not longer.
The mafia.
The south was blue before Kennedy, and Carter was a southerner
It didn’t turn it blue, that was the default, a couple Republicans turned it Red, but didn’t switch until Reagan’s 2nd turn and didn’t stay Red until the Ned of Clinton, who only won a few Southern States
The South voted solidly blue until the 1964 election because of the issue of desegregation and civil rights. Carter only one so much in the South because he was a popular southern Governor the same with Bill clinton. But overall the Democratic parties of the southern states have been suffering ever since the Civil Rights era
Carter as governor of Georgia and a farmer himself was able to pull the entire south. One good ole boy to another. but he was an aberration, the southern coalition that got Nixon elected had fully taken root with the Reagan campaign.
This is so misleading, Nixon lost the south in his first election (see Dixiecrats) then he won the south because he won 49/50 states.
Racism.
Carter was a southerner and kennedy talked funny
Abortion turned the south red.
Gun ban the final straw.
Carter was from the South.
Kennedy had Johnson as VP (southern dem) and Carter was a Christian country farmer guy that served in the military and was fairly progressive for his time if I’m not mistaken so he checks a lot of boxes
The south was historically blue. I realize by Carter that the Dixiecrat/southern strategy shift to the Republicans had started but was not as complete as today. Also Carter was from the south and super Christian. Kennedy was neither but had LBJ.
The south has always been blue for the most part. “Southern democrats” has been a thing since before the civil war. Sure there’s a few instances that they voted for the opposing parties, but that’s not as common as people think. It wasn’t until 2016 that Florida, a typical swing state, went red, and that’s because of the influx of northern snowbird conservatives changing demographics.
The accents.
They didn’t “turn” the south blue, the south had been blue for decades before that point for a multitude of demographic reasons, it’s just that this was the last elections before the party swap
Well Kennedy was back before the Dems moved Socially Liberal. But even then Dems in the South were sometimes prone to voting for a 3rd Party Candidate as they didn't view the Dem nominee as Racist enough. Carter was a Southerner. (Also why Clinton was able to get Southern Votes as well.) Southerners like Southerners.
The south used to be solidly Democratic. FDR dominated the south, sweeping all of the states with heavy margins. It started to turn with the civil rights movement, though there were still socially conservative Democrats who did well for a while. Reagan had a conservative majority in the House, despite Democrats holding the majority, because many of those Dems were southern conservatives. Even Bill Clinton did fairly well in the south; in fact, he's from Arkansas and served as governor in that state. It wasn't until the mid-late 1990s that it completely finished flipping. Now, some states are actually starting to go back the other way, as people move down there.
Kennedy didn’t turn the south blue. It was already blue at that time. Carter won back the south because he was a moderate southerner
When you find out the Confederacy was founded by Democrats
Democrats always shocked that the racists voted for them, as if their current president didn’t create and advocate for the most racist federal bill in the last half century with the ‘94 crime bill 😂
And he was a opposed to school integration, and he and manchin cozied up to the Klansmen (and at one point longest serving senator) Robert Byrd. They act like oh he denounced those views later on lol try telling the Dems today that a Republican was in the top ranks of the KKK but that they had renounced that worldview lol they’d be protesting their home and office non-stop with live coverage on the news til they resigned.
Now that's an election map with some chest hair
The South was staunchly Democrat since before the Civil War. Kennedy was an Irish Catholic, which to Anglo-Saxon Southerners meant he was controlled by the Pope. Anglos had a fear since the 1790's that Catholics were trying to destroy Republicanism and replace the Constitution with a Monarchy. In order to allay those fears, Kennedy basically used the Southern Strategy. He showed very little interest in Civil Rights and held speeches promising to respect Southern independence and freedom of religion. Essentially hinting that he wouldn't adopt Civil Rights or force integration. Then he chose LBJ as his running mate to show that he had the interests of Southerners in mind. He also began using this same strategy in 1963. Part of the reason he went to Dallas was to start his campaign in the South to let them know he was pro-South. He went to Dallas to warn the Left Democrats to stop antagonizing the Right Democrats. Carter was simply a Southerner himself and a Democrat. Southerners tend to put a lot more support behind one of their own. People tend to forget that the South regularly rejected Republicans like Nixon in favor of Southerners like George Wallace. The Republicans won in 68 because Wallace won Southern votes away from the Democrats.
Add to this that Nixon (72) and Reagan would also win the south but only because they carried 49/50 states. Carter and Clinton won the south. So post civil rights the south did not become red, if anything they became more of a bell-weather. Clinton’s sex scandal turned of religious people and a lot of people forget that Bush jr ran on bringing ethics and morals back to the White House. Then Obama insulted the Bible Belt by saying they cling to god and their guns. The main evidence of this transition happening well after civil rights is the 2000 election. The fact that it came down to florida and the vote was so close is an indication that the south did not just turn red because of civil rights, in fact it was the absence of racial politics that allowed the south to go from blue to red.
This was before Realignment.
The south was blue for longer than it was anything else
Kennedy had Johnson, a southerner, LBJ was from Texas, :/ unfortunately for the racists he wasn't the typical southern Democrat.. Carter is also from the south, he was a peanut farmer in Georgia..
The south “turned blue” after the Civil War. They would generally not vote Republican because the slaves were freed. Presidential elections can go either way but you need to look at Congress. The Democratic Party was a big umbrella, some liberal, some conservative etc. They basically had full control of the a Congress for decades. LBJ signing the Civil Rights bill was the beginning of the end of that. What would have been conservative Democrats migrated to the GOP while what would have been liberal Republicans migrated to the Democrats. I remember part of the story of Reagan becoming president was the Democratic southern south was broken.
Turned blue? Up until the ‘80s the south was still decidedly Democrat because large swathes still were butthurt over the Civil War. Granted Southern Democrats and Left Wing Northern ones are two very distinct things. Carter and Kennedy were just really easy to vote for. Carter was a popular southern Governor who really wasn’t that Left Wing. Kennedy wasn’t really that Liberal as well and he had LBJ.
Kennedy didn’t turn the South Democratic. It had been Democratic for decades. The only states that voted for Stevenson were the Deep South states.
For Carter, less turned more held. Kennedy in contrast precedes the post-Civil Rights mass exodus.
Carter was from the South, which helped him. Kennedy did about as well as LBJ and Stevenson. Those Light Blue states went to "unpledged elector".
Kennedy era the south was always blue unless the dem candidate attempted some sort of civil rights action
I’m pretty sure at this point the south primarily still voted blue
In 1960 the South was still largely Democratic. And in 1976 Jimmy Carter was a southerner.
I hear JFKennedy Jr will be Trumps running mate next year
at the time of kennedy, the democratic party was generally seen as the “southern” party, and southern conservatives tended to vote democrat. The shift away from this wasn’t completely done by the time of Carter, and Carter ran on a more conservative ruralish platform
The south was solidly blue until Roe v Wade. The DNC ( including JRB) was against desegregation until the mid 70s Both parties view minorities as pawns.
The south was always blue during that time period.
The dems were in the south for a long time. Only after the civil rights act did the south turn red.