CRT and no I don't mean Cathode Ray Tube

waiting................

for the hundredth time .. name me ONE other former Democrat/Dixiecrat politician who joined the Republican party.


we'll wait .. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

David Duke the former Grand Dragon of the LA KKK and an elected state rep in the state of LA. He left the democratic party in 1988 for the REPUBLICAN party. Isn't it interesting that two of America's best known racists were/are in the REPUBLICAN party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke

The 'racists' - are now the DPST fascists trying to stuff down the throats of americans a fake narrative that all Caucasians are racist at birth, and all blacks are victims of slavery and caucasian racism.



It is racist in itself, and deserves to thrown on teh trash heap of american rejection of racism, and embrace of Equality of All Under the Law.



Fascist DPST's ignore the Voting rights and Civil rights aCts of 1964 - and Martin Luther King, Jr. and his lessons in Peace and facing racism down.

he today would be vilified by the fascist DPST party!


'a' - deflection and denial - the KKK was found by southern Democrats - and today - at least half of teh members of teh kkk are FBI undercover.

Yet you fascist DPST love to set up this 'straw man' an object of terror to drive peoples of America into the plantation system of racism known as the democrat party.


sorry - you won't see that concept on Xinn - sadly - so those sheeple devotees of the fascist DPST marxist narrative are sadly uninformed.

David Duke the former Grand Dragon of the LA KKK and an elected state rep in the state of LA. He left the democratic party in 1988 for the REPUBLICAN party. Isn't it interesting that two of America's best known racists were/are in the REPUBLICAN party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke Originally Posted by adav8s28

yep. you fell for it. i knew you would. David Duke was never a national level politico. he was a state representative for four years from 1989 to 1992


from your own link ..

He served in the House from 1989 until 1992.[52]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke#As_state_representa tive


so now that you took the bait .. still waiting for you to name ONE Democrat/Dixiecrat at the national level (Senator/Congressman) or top state level i.e. Governor that switched to the Republican party.


still waiting ...

yep. you fell for it. i knew you would. David Duke was never a national level politico. he was a state representative for four years from 1989 to 1992


from your own link ..

He served in the House from 1989 until 1992.[52]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Duke#As_state_representa tive


so now that you took the bait .. still waiting for you to name ONE Democrat/Dixiecrat at the national level (Senator/Congressman) or top state level i.e. Governor that switched to the Republican party.


still waiting ... Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

does thurmond count?

does thurmond count? Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

no. because that's who he keeps bloviating about as his "proof" of some nonexistent mass defection of "dixiecrats" to the Republican party. and Duke doesn't count either he was never a national level politico. he was a state rep for 4 years. big whoop. if you lived in Louisiana during 1989 to 1992 he might have represented you depending on where you lived.

he's never gonna find another national level former dixiecrat/democrat that went to the Republican party not named Strom Thurmond.


because there is none.

THE BIG SWITCH THAT WASN’T: THE DIXIECRATS, RACE AND 1964

By Rick Chromey - March 3, 2021

It’s known as “The Big Switch.” That’s when Southern Democrat politicians converted to Republicanism and refashioned the G.O.P. into a racist political party.

The only problem? It’s not true. But first a little history.

The general narrative of this “switch” is capsulized in a 2017 History.com article.[1] The 30-something author documented how the Democratic Party–known for its historic racism–split in 1948 when Harry S. Truman (D-MO) first “introduced a pro-civil rights platform” into the Democratic Party. Strom Thurmond (D-SC) and a faction of Southern Democrats, consequently, bolted from Democrats to create the “States Rights” (Dixiecrat) party. The author then states these Dixiecrats eventually converted to Republicanism–along with Thurmond–in 1964. Later, Nixon’s “southern strategy” and Reagan’s conservatism moved the Democratic “blue” South to become a firm “red” Republican in the 1970s and 1980s.

Today, Democrats routinely finger Republicans as “racists,” pointing to occasional neo-Nazi politicians (David Duke, a one-term Louisiana state legislator), obscure racist organizations (Patriot Front) and Confederate flag-waving MAGA types. In fact, just wearing a MAGA hat is considered “racist” by many individuals on the left.

It’s a strong and divisive narrative…but what’s the TRUTH?

First of all, the “Dixiecrats,” under Strom Thurmond in 1948), did leave the Democratic Party…but for reasons more than racial. The Truman Administration–following sixteen years of Franklin D. Roosevelt–further desired to federalize and centralize government. The Southern Thurmond “Dixiecrats” believed in traditional “states’ rights” and segregation. The Northern and Western Democratic Party in the 1930s and 1940s was more “progressive” politically. President Roosevelt’s fascination with the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini and fascist government programs in Europe guided many of his domestic policies.

Consequently, the 1948 Truman-Democratic platform reflected more centralized and socialist government, thus angering and distancing Southern libertarians. That’s what really split the Democratic Party in 1948. In fact, in a platform that boasted 4,256 words only 106 (2.4%) were even devoted to civil rights (for the black or anyone else).[2] Even more surprisingly was how the party of slavery, segregation, Ku Klux Klan and Confederate secession was quick to pat itself on the back in 1948. In their summary on civil rights the Democratic Party actually claimed it alone was “responsible for the great civil rights gains” and committed to “continuing its efforts to eradicate all racial, religious and economic discrimination.”

However, such 1940s political posturing is contradicted by a Jim Crow Democratic South that still lynched blacks, refused school, hotel, restaurant, transportation and restroom facilities to “coloreds” and rigged voting procedures to suppress the black ballot. Therefore, it’s hard to believe “great gains” were actually made by Democrats. Harry Truman was allegedly an inactive participant in the Missouri KKK, and biographers often noted his latent racism against blacks, Jews, Chinese and Japanese throughout his life.[3] Meanwhile Franklin D. Roosevelt nominated a KKK member to the Supreme Court (Hugo Black), put Japanese-Americans into detention camps and refused to welcome black Olympians—including the famed Jesse Owens—to the White House.[4]

The Dixiecrat exodus was, again, more about progressive, fascist, socialism than segregation and black civil rights. In the end, despite predictions of a Thomas Dewey victory, the Dixiecrat exodus produced little gain. Truman won the ’48 presidency in a landslide electoral college vote while the Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond mustered an inconsequential 2.4% of the popular vote.[5]

Secondly, the Dixiecrats did NOT convert to Republicanism in 1964 (after Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act) as many historians and journalists now suggest. In fact, most of these racist libertarians returned to the Democratic Party after 1948 and became a significant voting block against civil rights and desegregation throughout the 1950s and early 1960s. According to one historical analysis, of the 1500+ racist “Dixiecrats” only Strom Thurmond and about a dozen others left the Democratic Party for the GOP (less than 1%). Furthermore, Thurmond didn’t switch parties until 16 years after Truman forced him to create his “Dixiecrat” party.

Thirdly, Southern whites (the people, not the politicians) did vote more REPUBLICAN in post-1965 elections, but not for racial reasons. Again, the Democratic Party was moving left, toward socialism, nonreligious/atheism and adopting liberal planks on abortion, women and gay rights. The Bible Belt South in the 1970s and 1980s became less racist as de-segregation and civil rights laws were enforced. Consequently, immigration to southern cities (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Nashville, Charlotte) by northern and western GOP conservatives rearranged the voting demographic. Southerners are more conservative and that’s why dozens of Democrats switched parties. Did you know notable Republicans Trent Lott, Mike Pence, William Bennett and Rick Perry were all previously Democrat? It’s true. And race was not the reason they switched affiliations…it was due to liberal/socialist policies.

Finally, the Republican Party and its leaders have consistently denounced and resisted the “alt right” ultra-conservative racist organizations. It’s why these racists formed their own political party in 2009 (The American Freedom Party). Republicans, historically, have always championed civil rights for the black and all ethnicities. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed thanks to widespread Republican support (who had proposed similar legislation in the Eisenhower administration). All Southern Democrats (including those Dixiecrats) voted against it. Oh, and David Duke? He only identified as Republican when politically expedient. Otherwise, he’s been in the Democrat, Populist or Reformed camp.

Maybe instead of looking at the anomaly of Strom Thurmond, we should investigate the political expediency of another Democrat: Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) who spent 62 years in public office. Byrd served for over half a century at the national level, as a Representative and, later, a powerful Senator. Byrd died in office (2010) at the ripe age of 92. Hillary Clinton called Byrd a “friend and mentor.” Barack Obama noted how “the arc of his life bent toward justice.” The press gave him a blessed pass.

That’s because Robert Byrd proved a quintessential post-WW2 Democrat. Originally a member and leader of the Ku Klux Klan in West Virginia (an affiliation he later disavowed), Byrd refused to fight in World War 2 because it meant serving alongside blacks. He routinely voted with other segregationists in the 1950s. As a senator, Byrd filibustered and voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He abstained his vote for the 1965 Voting Act. He also voted against the confirmation of Thurgood Marshall, the first black Supreme Court justice.

This same Robert Byrd then politically transformed from a known racist to a beloved mentor. How? Simple. He towed the party line…for nearly 57 years! It’s possible to argue Byrd didn’t lose his racism but rather, like most good politicians, shelved it. He enjoyed his power and position. It wasn’t the first time Byrd did what was necessary. In fact, the whole reason Byrd initially joined the KKK was for “political power.” To his credit, he did leave the organization, but still it showed Byrd to be a political opportunist. Once in national office, at least until 1967 (when being a segregationist went out of fashion), he retained his racist roots. Byrd told a reporter: “Don’t get that albatross [the KKK] around your neck. Once you’ve made that mistake, you inhibit your operations in the political arena.”[6]

Inhibit indeed.

It’s all politics. And it still is, for those who really listen close. It’s why we need to flip the script and tell the real story of what happened in 1948 and 1964.

I also believe America needs to echo, once again, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream and “look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

That’s what made America great…and will make America great again.
============================== ====
Dr. Rick Chromey is an author, historian and theologian who speaks and writes on matters of religion, culture, history, technology and leadership. He lives in Boise, ID. www.rickchromey.com

[1] “How The ‘Party of Lincoln’ Won Over the Once Democratic South” by Becky Little, August 18, 2017: https://www.history.com/news/how-the...mocratic-south

[2] Read the 1948 Democratic Platform: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/docu...party-platform

[3] Harry S. Truman’s racism was noted by historians and biographers. See “Truman’s Racist Talk Cited by Historian” (Seattle Times, November 3, 1991: https://archive.seattletimes.com/arc...3&slug=1314805) and “The Best Kind of Bigot: Harry Truman and His Hatreds” by Eric Fettman (New York Post, July 3, 2003: https://nypost.com/2003/07/31/the-be...d-his-hatreds/).

[4] “Why Was Jesse Owens Deprived of Presidential Recognition,” The Telegraph, May 27, 2016: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/ra...d-jesse-owens/

[5] The 1948 Presidential Election: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_U...ntial_election

[6] “The Democrats’ Lott”. The Wall Street Journal. December 23, 2002: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1040607367889016753

mike pence a democrat? no shit.

DF - Thank you for a well referenced history lesson
A shame that fascist DPST minions can never read it - too long, and 'history' is 'r....t" by definition to them.

Courtesy of orders from their nomenklatura and LSM.

Again why they trying to change history , doesn't work for them the way it is , just me

Again why they trying to change history , doesn't work for them the way it is , just me Originally Posted by rexdutchman

wouldn't you if your history is shit and full of racism? classic denial and deflection. call everyone else the racist while denying your racism.

If racism and sexism aren't applicable anymore why do Republicans keep electing so many old white christian males.

The democratic party is the party of multi-cultural-ism and the republican party is the party of rich old white Christians.

Black voters voted for Biden 92 percent in the 2020 election. Maybe because they can see that the current republican party is either blatantly racist or more likely just unwilling to confront the racists that are in the republican party. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

The Democrats had a chance to nominate a choice of a few women, a Cuban and an Asian but instead they nominated an old demented rich white guy who's actually racist. Ball is in your court dummy.

he was a state representative for four years from 1989 to


still waiting for you to name ONE Democrat/Dixiecrat at the national level (Senator/Congressman) or top state level i.e. Governor that switched to the Republican party.


still waiting ... Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

I answered your question that you raised in Post #150. Now you want to change the question because you got beat. You said name a politician other than Thurmond that left the democratic party for the republican party. You did not say that the person had to be a governor or senator just a politician. The question was answered. What is this Jeopardy? Stop WASTING my time TWK. I don't have time to play games with you. Two of Americas best known racists are associated with your Republican party. Deal with it.

I answered your question that you raised in Post #150. Now you want to change the question because you got beat. You said name a politician other than Thurmond that left the democratic party for the republican party. You did not say that the person had to be a governor or senator just a politician. The question was answered. What is this Jeopardy? Stop WASTING my time TWK. I don't have time to play games with you. Two of Americas best known racists are associated with your Republican party. Deal with it.
Originally Posted by adav8s28

you answered nothing butt keep telling yourself that so you'll keep believing it


BAHHAHHAAAAAAAAA


and then there is this ...


any DA NIALS?

THE BIG SWITCH THAT WASN’T: THE DIXIECRATS, RACE AND 1964

By Rick Chromey - March 3, 2021

It’s known as “The Big Switch.” That’s when Southern Democrat politicians converted to Republicanism and refashioned the G.O.P. into a racist political party.

The only problem? It’s not true. But first a little history.

The general narrative of this “switch” is capsulized in a 2017 History.com article.[1] The 30-something author documented how the Democratic Party–known for its historic racism–split in 1948 when Harry S. Truman (D-MO) first “introduced a pro-civil rights platform” into the Democratic Party. Strom Thurmond (D-SC) and a faction of Southern Democrats, consequently, bolted from Democrats to create the “States Rights” (Dixiecrat) party. The author then states these Dixiecrats eventually converted to Republicanism–along with Thurmond–in 1964. Later, Nixon’s “southern strategy” and Reagan’s conservatism moved the Democratic “blue” South to become a firm “red” Republican in the 1970s and 1980s.

Today, Democrats routinely finger Republicans as “racists,” pointing to occasional neo-Nazi politicians (David Duke, a one-term Louisiana state legislator), obscure racist organizations (Patriot Front) and Confederate flag-waving MAGA types. In fact, just wearing a MAGA hat is considered “racist” by many individuals on the left.

It’s a strong and divisive narrative…but what’s the TRUTH?

First of all, the “Dixiecrats,” under Strom Thurmond in 1948), did leave the Democratic Party…but for reasons more than racial. The Truman Administration–following sixteen years of Franklin D. Roosevelt–further desired to federalize and centralize government. The Southern Thurmond “Dixiecrats” believed in traditional “states’ rights” and segregation. The Northern and Western Democratic Party in the 1930s and 1940s was more “progressive” politically. President Roosevelt’s fascination with the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini and fascist government programs in Europe guided many of his domestic policies.

Consequently, the 1948 Truman-Democratic platform reflected more centralized and socialist government, thus angering and distancing Southern libertarians. That’s what really split the Democratic Party in 1948. In fact, in a platform that boasted 4,256 words only 106 (2.4%) were even devoted to civil rights (for the black or anyone else).[2] Even more surprisingly was how the party of slavery, segregation, Ku Klux Klan and Confederate secession was quick to pat itself on the back in 1948. In their summary on civil rights the Democratic Party actually claimed it alone was “responsible for the great civil rights gains” and committed to “continuing its efforts to eradicate all racial, religious and economic discrimination.”

However, such 1940s political posturing is contradicted by a Jim Crow Democratic South that still lynched blacks, refused school, hotel, restaurant, transportation and restroom facilities to “coloreds” and rigged voting procedures to suppress the black ballot. Therefore, it’s hard to believe “great gains” were actually made by Democrats. Harry Truman was allegedly an inactive participant in the Missouri KKK, and biographers often noted his latent racism against blacks, Jews, Chinese and Japanese throughout his life.[3] Meanwhile Franklin D. Roosevelt nominated a KKK member to the Supreme Court (Hugo Black), put Japanese-Americans into detention camps and refused to welcome black Olympians—including the famed Jesse Owens—to the White House.[4]

The Dixiecrat exodus was, again, more about progressive, fascist, socialism than segregation and black civil rights. In the end, despite predictions of a Thomas Dewey victory, the Dixiecrat exodus produced little gain. Truman won the ’48 presidency in a landslide electoral college vote while the Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond mustered an inconsequential 2.4% of the popular vote.[5]

Secondly, the Dixiecrats did NOT convert to Republicanism in 1964 (after Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act) as many historians and journalists now suggest. In fact, most of these racist libertarians returned to the Democratic Party after 1948 and became a significant voting block against civil rights and desegregation throughout the 1950s and early 1960s. According to one historical analysis, of the 1500+ racist “Dixiecrats” only Strom Thurmond and about a dozen others left the Democratic Party for the GOP (less than 1%). Furthermore, Thurmond didn’t switch parties until 16 years after Truman forced him to create his “Dixiecrat” party.

Thirdly, Southern whites (the people, not the politicians) did vote more REPUBLICAN in post-1965 elections, but not for racial reasons. Again, the Democratic Party was moving left, toward socialism, nonreligious/atheism and adopting liberal planks on abortion, women and gay rights. The Bible Belt South in the 1970s and 1980s became less racist as de-segregation and civil rights laws were enforced. Consequently, immigration to southern cities (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Nashville, Charlotte) by northern and western GOP conservatives rearranged the voting demographic. Southerners are more conservative and that’s why dozens of Democrats switched parties. Did you know notable Republicans Trent Lott, Mike Pence, William Bennett and Rick Perry were all previously Democrat? It’s true. And race was not the reason they switched affiliations…it was due to liberal/socialist policies.

Finally, the Republican Party and its leaders have consistently denounced and resisted the “alt right” ultra-conservative racist organizations. It’s why these racists formed their own political party in 2009 (The American Freedom Party). Republicans, historically, have always championed civil rights for the black and all ethnicities. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed thanks to widespread Republican support (who had proposed similar legislation in the Eisenhower administration). All Southern Democrats (including those Dixiecrats) voted against it. Oh, and David Duke? He only identified as Republican when politically expedient. Otherwise, he’s been in the Democrat, Populist or Reformed camp.

Maybe instead of looking at the anomaly of Strom Thurmond, we should investigate the political expediency of another Democrat: Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) who spent 62 years in public office. Byrd served for over half a century at the national level, as a Representative and, later, a powerful Senator. Byrd died in office (2010) at the ripe age of 92. Hillary Clinton called Byrd a “friend and mentor.” Barack Obama noted how “the arc of his life bent toward justice.” The press gave him a blessed pass.

That’s because Robert Byrd proved a quintessential post-WW2 Democrat. Originally a member and leader of the Ku Klux Klan in West Virginia (an affiliation he later disavowed), Byrd refused to fight in World War 2 because it meant serving alongside blacks. He routinely voted with other segregationists in the 1950s. As a senator, Byrd filibustered and voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He abstained his vote for the 1965 Voting Act. He also voted against the confirmation of Thurgood Marshall, the first black Supreme Court justice.

This same Robert Byrd then politically transformed from a known racist to a beloved mentor. How? Simple. He towed the party line…for nearly 57 years! It’s possible to argue Byrd didn’t lose his racism but rather, like most good politicians, shelved it. He enjoyed his power and position. It wasn’t the first time Byrd did what was necessary. In fact, the whole reason Byrd initially joined the KKK was for “political power.” To his credit, he did leave the organization, but still it showed Byrd to be a political opportunist. Once in national office, at least until 1967 (when being a segregationist went out of fashion), he retained his racist roots. Byrd told a reporter: “Don’t get that albatross [the KKK] around your neck. Once you’ve made that mistake, you inhibit your operations in the political arena.”[6]

Inhibit indeed.

It’s all politics. And it still is, for those who really listen close. It’s why we need to flip the script and tell the real story of what happened in 1948 and 1964.

I also believe America needs to echo, once again, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream and “look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

That’s what made America great…and will make America great again.
============================== ====
Dr. Rick Chromey is an author, historian and theologian who speaks and writes on matters of religion, culture, history, technology and leadership. He lives in Boise, ID. www.rickchromey.com

[1] “How The ‘Party of Lincoln’ Won Over the Once Democratic South” by Becky Little, August 18, 2017: https://www.history.com/news/how-the...mocratic-south

[2] Read the 1948 Democratic Platform: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/docu...party-platform

[3] Harry S. Truman’s racism was noted by historians and biographers. See “Truman’s Racist Talk Cited by Historian” (Seattle Times, November 3, 1991: https://archive.seattletimes.com/arc...3&slug=1314805) and “The Best Kind of Bigot: Harry Truman and His Hatreds” by Eric Fettman (New York Post, July 3, 2003: https://nypost.com/2003/07/31/the-be...d-his-hatreds/).

[4] “Why Was Jesse Owens Deprived of Presidential Recognition,” The Telegraph, May 27, 2016: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/ra...d-jesse-owens/

[5] The 1948 Presidential Election: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_U...ntial_election

[6] “The Democrats’ Lott”. The Wall Street Journal. December 23, 2002: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1040607367889016753 Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm