Larry Sabato thread on why it's wrong to view 1970s busing through lens of 2019

[highplainsdem]

Thread starts here:

Link to tweet

Entire text, courtesy of Threadreader:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1144660745642217472.html

1/Controversial 'busing' era in 1970s is being framed through the lens of 2019. High unpopularity of busing (most whites & many blacks) resulted in a liberal candidate for VA GOV losing his race to the R in a squeaker after he had led handily earlier. Why? On election day, he was

2/described as the "pro-busing" candidate by the then-host of The Today Show (#1 a.m. show) just as people were going to vote. (Back then, no early voting and few absentees) Richmond, VA was ground zero for busing & school consolidation. #1 issue. Candidate lost area by

3/massive %, higher than anybody had projected. Lost statewide by 15,000 votes out of 1 million +. Candidate tried to get immediate correction b/c it actually wasn't true--he'd finessed the topic. Didn't happen. Candidate wanted to sue host Frank McGee, but pointless.

4/Even after Agnew resignation, Saturday Night Massacre, Watergate revelations in weeks before election day, busing overrode everything. VA & DE were both conservative states back then. Everything had to go right for a D to win. When @JoeBiden wrote the busing letter to Eastland

5/it was 1977--a year before his first reelection when another win for Biden was not assured. So he (& many other Ds) had a choice--be a profile in courage and lose, or oppose busing in whole or in part & win to fight another day on stronger ground.

6/The lens of 2019 presents this as a choice between Good vs Evil. But it was more complicated than that. Busing caused cancellation of many extracurriculars and children left home very early & got back home very late. No unanimity in black community on busing as there had been

7/for Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and Open Housing law. I'm not asserting Biden made the right decision, just sharing my own knowledge about that difficult era. So easy today to say what a pol should have done--but so out of touch with the real politics of that time.

[LonePirate]

1. We need to focus on issues of the 2020s and not ones from the 1970s.

This entire busing topic is not a winner for Dems.

[highplainsdem]

2. Agree.

[Thekaspervote]

3. Finally... a voice of sanity!

[LiberalFighter]

4. It irks me when they don't consider the issues that had to be considered back then.

[femmedem]

5. Thank you for posting that well-informed perspective.

I'm learning a lot about this issue here.

[peggysue2]

6. The money line:

but so out of touch with the real politics of that time.

Yes, because things are never as simple about the past as we pretend them to be. A purity prism does not give you a complete picture of the times, the events or the people involved. And we better be ready to deal with the political mess of the moment because a failure to kick the Trumpster to the curb will be catastrophic. For everyone.

Here's a thought: let's not do the Republicans' work for them, as in tearing ourselves apart or getting on the bandwagon for the unfeasible. Open borders, for instance. We want to lose this election? This is the one-way ticket to do it.

[Silver Gaia]

9. Yes. This. My thoughts exactly.

We cannot judge the past by the standards of today. That is too simplistic. Those of good heart, which I consider Joe (and Kamala) to be, weigh their choices at any given time according to the information available to them in that time and place, and take a stab at the best possible choice they see. That's all any of us can ever do.

There are many times when my parents have lamented choices they made with the best of intentions, and myself as a parent, too, but we know we would do the same thing over again in that same time and place. Because the circumstances around that choice would be the same, and we would not have the benefit of hindsight as we do now. The past is what it is. We cannot know what might have happened had we chosen differently, and for all we know, a different choice that fits with today's sensibilities could have ended up far worse in the long run because of unforseen and unconsidered factors that existed THEN. We need to leave the past where it is and focus on today.

You are correct that there really should just be ONE goal, which is ousting Trump from his wannabe dictatorship. If we fail to do that, NOTHING else matters. That should be our focus as one, united Party, a laser focus on removing this dangerous buffoon from our House by any and all means possible. Infighting is not going to get us there.

[Duppers]

13. Bingo: "ONE goal... ousting Trump..."

"ONE goal, which is ousting Trump from his wannabe dictatorship."

Exactly. And has Harris knocked out our best chance (not saying best candidate)? She advanced herself at what cost?

Posted and wrote to a friend earlier:

Back in the early 70s, the men controlling these committees were segregationists and the then 27yo Biden knew he had to compromise with these a.holes in order to get anywhere.

Life is full of regretful compromises.

Edited to include a great MM post I just found:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287179349

[JoeOtterbein]

7. That's what good about trying to do the right thing; it's much simpler.

Any candidate knows this and makes a choice. Joe made the wrong choice on the busing issue at what he thought was the best time.

Joe is still wrong.

And Kamala is correct

After that it gets complicated.

[bucolic_frolic]

8. He points to a flaw in reasoning for most subjects

Monday morning quarterbacking. Compared to today, past eras had really slow information feeds from very few sources. I do look back and criticize, and say, how could I have done this or that? A relative always had the observation - "WHAT were they THINKing?"

[Indygram]

10. Yay...another thread about sh!t that doesn't matter while babies are sleeping in their own feces

on the border.

Jesus H. Christ....

[Duppers]

12. This is about getting rid of the root cause!

Trump and his administration. This is about the election to remove that sadist.

[Cha]

17. That's your opinion.. we can multi-task. Sorry,

you don't get to decide what gets posted here.

[Duppers]

11. K & R

I wrote to a friend earlier:

Back in the early 70s, the men controlling these committees were segregationists and the then 27yo Biden knew he had to compromise with these a.holes in order to get anywhere.

Think how badly Anita Hill was judged for putting up with Clarence Thomas' lewd advances.

And in order to "stay in the game" think how many times you'd had to compromise with people you've thoroughly despised.

[colorado_ufo]

14. And beyond all that -

if I were Biden, I would have said,

"Kamala, you and I have been good friends for years. You never once spoke about this with me. If you had a personal grievance with me (and you HAVE made this personal), why did you choose to bring it up now, in a public forum, on national television? Did you just do it to hurt me, to maybe improve your chance at the White House? I think that there are many more positive avenues that you could have taken; I'm sorry that you chose this very old one. Now, let me address a few points . . ." "For instance, being the right-hand man for eight years for the first black president of the United States. He obviously had more trust in me than you do."

Kamala Harris took a cheap shot, and it was planned. Re-watching the debate, as Biden (knocked off guard) tried to explain his position from decades ago, I saw an expression on her face that she probably wore many times as a prosecutor. It was an expression that said, "Got him."

This was the first debate. She set him up, and then aimed for the heart. How many poison arrows are in her quiver?

I suppose that she might as well use them on her fellow Democrats, as Trump will simply refuse to debate her or any other Democratic candidate. His base will remain loyal without it.

[paleotn]

15. I lived it as well....

and he's wrong. In VA, DE and throughout the south, it wasn't hard for a Dem to win just because those states were more conservative then now. Far from it. It depended on what kind of Dem they were. I grew up in the south where conservative, racist Dems of varying degrees were common and liberal Republicans up north weren't uncommon. In short, the politics then was very different than today. Both tents were far larger.

What mattered wasn't liberal or conservative as we know it....it was race. In Nashville, opposition was all about race and nothing else. Desegregation caused an explosion of private schools in the 70's and 80's, where white parents ended up wagging their kids much further than they ever would have been bused, just so those kids didn't rub elbows with black kids. In the vast number of cases, it was the black kids who faced the long bus rides out to the suburbs to escape separate and unequal. And yes, majority black schools were sub par compared to those in white neighborhoods, even in metro Nashville, Davidson county, where they all fell under the same school system.

There were many, even in the south, who applauded the federal government forcing school systems, kicking and screaming, to do the right thing....end separate and unequal. But the majority of whites were varying degrees of racist. Many still are. And they voted their racism. Like many Dems in that era, Biden could have done the "Washington two step" and avoided the question at all costs. He chose to go all out anti-busing as a political strategy. Looking back, I have more respect for the evasive ones than those who made a pact with the devil in order to get elected or stay elected.

He made a decision. A bad one. I don't categorize him by that one decision. Uncle Joe has done great things for all Americans. But it does emphasize the fact that maybe it's time to move on to other candidate who aren't sullied with the awful calculus of the 70's. Maybe it's time to move on to new generation.

[Bucky]

20. You've perfectly described why the founding fathers called for rotation in office

We need to keep renewing who holds power. Old hands hold old grudges and get too comfortable living around the powers that can corrupt them. I love Joe, but it's time for him to play elder statesman.

[StarfishSaver]

16. "Context of the times" isn't the issue.

State's rights wasn't a valid argument against civil rights remedies then and it isn't a valid justification for opposition to them today.

[Cha]

18. Thank you for this invaluble information,

highplainsdem!

[Bucky]

19. 4 decades of white flight has eliminated busing as an issue

So, while from a historical angle, I agree we should understand busing from a mid70s perspective, that's not how politics works.

What's also wrong is trying to tell people how they should see things. After all, Last Sabato is telling us

So he (& many other Ds) had a choice--be a profile in courage and lose, or oppose busing in whole or in part & win to fight another day on stronger ground.

But it's the same conundrum today. We can hohum past the feelings people have about racial discrimination and turn off critical blocs of Democratic voters, out we can get on the right side of history and strengthen our base.

I love Joe Biden, but he's handling this controversy terribly, and I think that this speaks to his readiness to take on Trump.

[Curky]

21. What did JFK think about bussing?

Asking for a friend.