I refuse to cede the South to the Republicans in '04!

[Padraig18]

Since Richard Nixon's campaign first conceived it's 'Southern Strategy' in 1968, Democrats have effectively ceded control of the 13 states of the Confederacy to the GOP. WHY, in God's name, I must ask?

Have you reason to doubt that the ordinary people of Georgia care less about full employment in decent, high-wage jobs? Do the people of Mississippi care less than the people of Massachussetts that the schools their children attend are crumbling and under-funded? Do the voters of Texas not need quality health care? Are the citizens of Virginia exempt from the long-term effects of profligate spending and tax 'cuts' which are, in reality, only loans against their children and grandchildren's future earnings?

No, no, NO--- a thousand times NO! I will NOT concede the South or abandon its people to the tender mercies of the GOP yet again! They are my brothers and my sisters, and they deserve to be both heard and served by our party! The issues WE care about are the same issues they care about, and it is time we remembered that; give them hope for a better future and a new day in America. Help them to understand why they MUST support our party once again.

/rant off

Thank you!

[comradebillyboy]

1. unless you are the nominee

you may have little real input to that decision.

but i dont think dean will write off the south

[Padraig18]

2. He won't.

I think that much is clear. :)

[ewagner]

3. This is a good rant Padrig

I think it comes down to a debate between two diametrically opposed discussions on strategy:

The first says that we win by reaching for the undecideds or politically soft "middle" which would include reaching out to the southern states.

The second says that we split the nation into "with us or against us" groups and hope that we come out with "half + 1 " in the EC.

Which camp is right? I don't know.

The oldest campaign management rule in the book is "start from your strength and reach out". The problem is that we have become so polarized as a nation, that if we work too hard to solidify our base, we may lose the opportunity to "reach out" afterwards.

Reachiong out to the South and to moderate conservatives may mean that compromises will have to be made. Are we willing to compromise? If so, what is negotiatable and what is not?

[Ksec]

4. hmm

I dont think you or me or anyone else can change the South. Thats up to the south themselves. If they want to take the country down along with the Repubs what can we do besides try to educate them to what theyre supporting when the Repubs are in power. I have no use for the South myself. If it were my call I would split the country in two and let them live with there choices.

[ArkDem]

6. In the south

"there" is NOT a pronoun.

[Ksec]

7. Pardon me.

Their. Ive always messed those up.

[Cannikin]

11. Hey, arkdem...

That's pretty good for an Arkansas public education! Must not be all bad after all! Nice to have some neighbors in here.

[mermaid]

30. My Thoughts Exactly!!

But do me a favor...if we actually DO that...I AM a transplanted Northerner...please allow me re-admission into the North if this happens. I don't want to live in the kind of HELL the South would be without any check and balance!

[Monte Carlo]

I think a lot of the problem comes from how the debate is framed.

It's not more funds for better schools, it's the gov't taking more of YOUR income!

It's not the gov'ts money, it's the people's money!

It's not about unionizing for collective bargaining, it's suffocating the businesses that make our economy!

I think anti-government runs deep within the former Confederacy. Too deep, if you'd ask me, but no matter what I think, it still is a pickle.

The GOP does everything it can to reinforce the 'government and politicians are evil conquerers who only want more control over us and more of our money' line. The 'there is no society, only individuals' line. Now, that's not entirely fantasy, but it has been warped and abused beyond all usefulness. Look at Alabama - the entire state infrastructure is crumbling because they, IMHO, continue to associate all taxes with oppression. What they largely don't seem to get is that the government is the creation of the people, and is only as good as we make it to be, that it, like Teddy Roosevelt and the preamble to the Constitution said, IS US.

I think we need to start taking back the debate. We need to reintroduce the importance of collective action into the American consciousness.

[BootinUp]

24. Yes, thats a big part of it. n/t

[Monte Carlo]

26. What else would you say?

Just why the hell do Democrats have such problems with Southern States, anyway? The farthest south I've ever been is to Washington, D.C.

EDIT: and to Disney World, but that didn't seem much like the Southern experience.

[mermaid]

33. I'll Tell You The Problems....

We Dems are percieved as being FOR everything the average redneck Southerner is against..and against everything he is FOR.

We are percieved as anti-gun, pro-gay, pro-civil rights, anti-god.

Now, with the exception of the last one...they have a valid point, and I am proud of our Party's stance on the first three. Not that it makes us very appealing to Southerners.

But we do need to take God back. We cannot allow the GOP to claim a monopoly on God, and paint us as Godless.

Go look at http://www.liberalslikechrist.com
or it might be .org, not sure.

If you want to win in the South...what are you willing to compromise? Human and civil rights? The South is against both.

Are you willing to compromise gun control?
The south is aganst gun control.

Are you willing to sell your gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender brothers and sisters down the river?

Are you willing to allow "Christian" dogma (read: hate-filled propaganda)to be forced down YOUR child's throat in public school?

What do you offer to the South?

I write them off because they are completely hopeless. I know, I live down here, and I can attest to this. Southerners are a lost cause. They knee-jerk react like puppets on a string to four issues: Guns, Gays, God, Government out of my life (lower taxes, and less civil rights, and less government regulation on business...so that they can continue to oppress the workers, and pay sub-standard wages)

These are the basic FOUR G's of Southern ideology.

[Bombtrack]

5. We don't have to, however you and other liberals need to stop assuming

that the way to win the south is to basically as doctor Dean and his merry men have implied, tell them they've been turned into racists.

Dean is not going to win a southern state or come close, including Florida, because southern animosity towards CERTAIN democrats is no longer based on in any large enough way on racism any longer to make the "southern strategy exposure" claims they are making.

[Padraig18]

8. Thanks for distorting Gov. Dean's comments.

He's never said anything remotely similar to what you allege, and I think your 'prediction' is self-defeating, not to mention 'all wet'.

Have a nice day. :hi:

[Ksec]

9. I disagree that racism ISNT the main reason

because it is. Why else would they vote for their own destruction if not for something so deep rooted such as race. It was the reason in 64 and its still the dominant reason today

[Bombtrack]

17. a couple of BIG regions within the south have voted for democrats

more than republicans. In presidential elections, the southern lowlands have been swept by carter, won by Clinton, won by Clinton again, and almost split by Gore.

They have, however, rejected like a misplaced organ, McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis. Because of the CLEAR similarites Dean shares with the latter 3, he has to preempt the thought in his supporters and potential supporters heads with a web of bullshit that he infact, would be BETTER suited than rural populist southernors like Edwards, moderate religious men like Liberman, war heros like Kerry, and rural populist war heros like Clark

[Padraig18]

19. Dean is NOT McGovern, Mondale or Dukakis.

He is completely different, both in style and in substance.

[Bombtrack]

25. No kidding padraig but he does have striking similarities with them that

others don't

McGovern : Likely supported by my most leftist/dovish segment of primary electorate, against foriegn policy that clear majority of electorate favored, also favored economic platform that clear majority of middle class electorate apposed. Favored by incumbant republican whitehouse to win nomination, and was helped by political dirty tricks team led by segretti stifling his opponents like Ed Muskie - - - clear parallels can be seen there

Mondale : Lost more than any other reason by proposing across the board middle class income tax raises, or as his supporters put it "just going back to the taxes of the previous administration in the previous decade". - - - clear parallels can be seen there

Dukakis : Governor of small New England state, among 2 or 3 most liberal or left-wing state reputation wise, was well known for association with controversial social issue that most swing and non-liberal leaning regions apposed outright. Secondarily was easy target for foriegn/military policy non-credibility, despite military service - - - Clear parallel only Vermont smaller and liberaler than Massachusetts, social issue civil unions instead of death penalty, Dean has no military service while Dukakis did

[Padraig18]

27. Learn my name or my nick, then use it.

I will reply when you learn how to do that.

have a nice day. :hi:

[Bombtrack]

32. your right, it's hard enough ot get dean supporters to adress real critism

of Dean, without them calling you a rethug-lite, or saying Karl Rove thanks you

Since you don't do that, I edited the post. And no shit sherlock isn't a nickname it's a phrase

[Padraig18]

34. reply:

McGovern : Likely supported by my most leftist/dovish segment of primary electorate, against foriegn policy that clear majority of electorate favored, also favored economic platform that clear majority of middle class electorate apposed. Favored by incumbant republican whitehouse to win nomination, and was helped by political dirty tricks team led by segretti stifling his opponents like Ed Muskie - - - clear parallels can be seen there

No parallel: Dean is supported by a far wider spectrum than 'leftist/dovish' Democrats; most of his supporters are moderates. Unless I've missed something, most Americans are still in favor of a multi-lateral foreign/military policy,as is Gov. Dean; do you know differently? Who the WH 'favors' is a matter of PUREST speculation on your part, unless you have an inside track to the WH.

Mondale : Lost more than any other reason by proposing across the board middle class income tax raises, or as his supporters put it "just going back to the taxes of the previous administration in the previous decade". - - - clear parallels can be seen there

Dean does, indeed, want to cancel Bush's fiscally-outrageous tax cuts, so I will grant a similarity of positions.

Dukakis : Governor of small New England state, among 2 or 3 most liberal or left-wing state reputation wise, was well known for association with controversial social issue that most swing and non-liberal leaning regions apposed outright. Secondarily was easy target for foriegn/military policy non-credibility, despite military service - - - Clear parallel only Vermont smaller and liberaler than Massachusetts, social issue civil unions instead of death penalty, Dean has no military service while Dukakis did

Slight parallel only: New England, yes, and perceived as 'liberal', BUT... he himself is a moderate/centrist with a CLEAR record of being fiscally-conservative; balanced 12 state budgets, even though that is not required. The 'no military service' issue will be a non-issue, IMO; do you think * will dare raise 'military service' as an issue? I relish that prospect.

[Bombtrack]

37. so you're denying that Dean didn't latch on to the anti-war movement?

it is rediculous to not clearly see that Dean wouldn't have got that instant organization had it not been for the pre-established anti-war movement, or that that isn't the one issue that trumps all as far as his support came from.

What OTHER issue that he has drivent a wedge between himself and the other candidtes. Was there a critical mass of people or a movement IN THE MIDDLE CLASS just dying to have their income taxes raised.

Are NRA/ second amendment single issuers the key?

Dean's supporters DO care about the war more than any other issue or atleast did, AS A WHOLE, LOOKED AT ON AVERAGE. Probably after that, it's the civil unions, where he did get a lot of gay support, but most likely a majority of that gay support is also anti-war

and if they aren't in fact more far left on average than the other candidates, I hope you'll admit that they are on this website. If they weren't, such a large percentage wouldn't splurt out DLC, whore, and combination of -lite or -light with republica, rethuglican, puke, etc. Or tell you you are rovian, or Zell Miller, or Joe Lieberman, who to them are all as bad as another.

please admit that the majority of moderate hate here comes mostly from Kucinich and Dean supporters, many Dean supporters who say they are politically to the left of Dean

[Padraig18]

38. I'll concede NONE of that

Dean did not 'latch on to the anti-war movement'; he was against the war and said so, as did Congressman Kucinich. As for the remainder of your post, simply do NOT agree--- at all.

[Bombtrack]

40. there has to be one major candidate with the most left-wing support

anti-mainstream, naderite if you will, at least on this website.

if you won't admit it, I hope someone else will

[Padraig18]

45. Cong. Kucinich

I think the lion's share of the 'traditional liberals' to whom you refer are probably supporting him--- most, but not all.

[Bombtrack]

48. MAJOR CANDIDATE, sorry if you don't accept that language

but by major candidate I refur to Clark, Dean, Edwards, Gephardt, Kerry, and Lieberman

[Padraig18]

52. As far as i know, no one has done a demographical analysis.

So I wouldn't be able to honestly and intelligently answer your question, lacking factual data.

[Bombtrack]

54. what about this website, what about the evidence I sighted

or have you "missed" the tendancy of you're colleagues to be anti-moderate and who in many ways embrace the proclamation of Dean to the 'real democrat', and the others to be, something else.

if the labels I sigted earlier "rethug-lite" etc don't remind you of anyone you clearly haven't been reading the same message board as I

[Padraig18]

56. Please refrain from attacks on us as a group.

And please refrain from disparaging either my intelligence or my eyesight; 'badgering' and ridicule are very poor techniques in facilitating an intelligent exchange of ideas. Thanks.

[BootinUp]

46. What poll shows this though

"No parallel: Dean is supported by a far wider spectrum than 'leftist/dovish' Democrats; most of his supporters are moderates"

The Gallup poll from late november early december clearly showed Dean was stronger with more liberal dems and weaker with moderates and conservatives. He had 40% of the self described liberal dems. Clark was slightly higher in moderates and significantly higher in conservative dems.

[Padraig18]

55. "Dean is supported by a far wider spectrum than 'leftist/dovish' Democrats

Pretty self-explanatory, and your figures prove my point: 60% are NOT 'leftist/dovish' Democrats, to use Bombtrack's term. :)

[BootinUp]

58. Well

I didn't make the numbers very clear, the breakdown of support for all dems was that dean had 40% of the liberals dems polled and something less than 12 of the the conservatives.

His support is stronger from the left.

[Padraig18]

59. I'm left of center, and I can understand that.

:)

[Bombtrack]

20. and how then were McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis more "pro-black"

or less acceptable to the apparently majority racist (according to you) than Carter, Clinton, and Gore

[Cannikin]

12. You left out 'megga dittos', Bombtrack

[BootinUp]

10. I've lived here for 14 years

I'm a So. Cal. dude originally. Was in Charlotte NC for 10 years, and now Atlanta metro for 3 going on 4.

What you need to understand, is the South has bought into the whole tax cut equals jobs argument. And they don't trust many democrats. You have to have someone they can trust telling the story. Since the democrats stand for some social issues that they feel are against the bible etc. that makes it harder to get them to listen too. I'm not sure how much the racial thing applies anymore. I think the religion thing is just as strong these days. Not saying this is valid, but you can't win 'em over if they won't even listen to you. Rabble rousers like Rush Limbaugh and Hannity make it worse.

Dean knows this as do many others, the question is how to get their trust, and then how to win the economy argument.

[Padraig18]

13. This is why I think Dean may exceed expectations in the South.

I think he understands well, on a 'gut level', why Southerners don't trust Democrats; understanding the 'opponent' you face is the first step in defeating it, and I believe Gov. Dean is intelligent enough to make major inroads into the South, because of his understanding.

[BootinUp]

14. He has a big hurdle

and not much time to clear it. When I say get their trust, I do not believe you can do that in one campaign. These people are not idiots, they wanna see the record, the bona fides, before they trust you.

[Padraig18]

16. It won't be a sweep, by any means.

But... there are states where we are 'close', and that is where I believe Gov. Dean can do well. I have several friends in the South who tell me that voter apathy is not uniquely 'Northern', and that many moderate Southerners have simply given up voting. These are the people Howard can reach out to, just as he has done already in his primary campaign.

[Ksec]

15. So they arent smart enough to see that the cuts dont work?

Im not being a wise guy here but to believe the South buys into Trickle down tells me they arent readin a whole lot down THERE. Its been proven a loser . I think you have a valid point with the Bible Belt argument, its definetly swaying a whole bunch of people from voting for the Godless Immoral Gay loving perverted Democrats. (sarcasm for you challenged people who take everything literally)

But I still believe Race is the main culprit followed by the Bible thumpers.

[BootinUp]

21. Well again its the trust thang

(occasionally I get a little twang goin')

Look there are just as many books, articles, and tv commentators that will make a case (not necessarily a valid one) that Reagan and Bush I were economic geniuses, and the recession in 2001 was caused by Clinton. Its who do they trust. And that usually comes down to those that side with them on the other issues.

[boxster]

18. No, Democrats have NOT conceded the South since '68.

Jimmy Carter was from Georgia. Do you think he conceded the South? Obviously not, since he won the presidency in '76.

Bill Clinton won many Southern states in '92 (including Georgia - one of your examples) and in '96. He most certainly didn't "concede" the South, especially the African-American voters there.

Yes, much of the South is currently conservative and Republican-leaning. But, to claim that it has been so since 1968 is to ignore many of the elections held since then.

Your point is well-taken, but your reasoning is flawed. Closer to reality is the fact that we haven't made a dent in the South in decades without a Southern as our candidate. If you are going to consider history as the guide, perhaps you should look at your preferred candidate in the same historical context.

[Padraig18]

23. I was referring to a mindset.

it is my belief that we democrats look at the South, by and large, with an "Oh, well, let's do what we must, for appearances' sake.". THAT is what I will fight against tooth and nail.

:)

[boxster]

36. I disagree with the generalization that we ignore the South.

And, I'm sure people like Ann Richards, Jimmy Carter, Dick Gephardt, Bob Graham, Max Cleland, John Edwards, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and many, many, many other Democrats who have done all they can for the South would agree.

I understand what you're trying to say, and it's often said by many Democrats, especially those unhappy with the DLC or supporting a candidate who is anti-establishment where the Democratic leadership is concerned. Many believe that because we did poorly in 2000 in the South that we've abandoned it entirely.

But, in general, I don't see it. I think that Nixon and Reagan are given way too much credit for "swinging" the South. People forget that Nixon and Reagan won in landslides and had strong support nearly everywhere in the U.S. except for some very liberal strongholds.

Carter and Clinton both did well in many Southern states, so the "swing" is obviously not permanent and obviously not complete. Gore's horrible showing in the South was the exception, not the rule, and was caused in part by a weak campaign strategy.

One weak showing out of the past three does not equate to conceding the South since 1968.

I think you're also ignoring the cultural differences, as Dean and many of his supporters tend to do. Dean's belief that he's "smart enough" to convince Southerns why they should vote Democratic isn't likely as powerful as having a presidential candidate from the South in the first place.

If Dean wins the nomination, he really needs a strong Southern VP - Clark, Edwards, or Graham would do quite nicely.

[Padraig18]

47. I think most fo our disagreement is semantic in nature.

In substance, I agree with most of what you say. I agree that a strong running mate (Graham or Clark, e.g., or John Breaux) could well bring some states into the 'blue fold' next November. :)

[Scott Lee]

51. Howard put his hand out to the South, and look what it got him

from the loudmouth frothers among the statist dems...."confederate flag lover!"..."pandering to racists!"....RAAAAAAAAKKKKK!!!!

But the story is ending on a happy note. Dean's Southern Strategy is actually *gasp* WORKING. And to boot, he still leads Clark in the south by a good 3 to 1 margin. So much for the idea that the South only goes for military folks.

[boxster]

53. It's Dean's own fault.

He obviously meant to say that Southerners should be voting Democratic because of common beliefs. Instead he said that he wanted to be "the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks."

Obviously, those are two entirely different sentiments. Any reasonable person should be able to see that, though obviously, a zillion DUers can't tell the difference.

I certainly wouldn't give credit for any success he has in the South to his screw-up. He's doing ok in the South despite it. Had he not misspoken, he wouldn't have had a problem in the first place and would likely be doing even better.

[Scott Lee]

61. It's not Deans fault that some people can't process wit

Perhaps in the future, he can provide pop-up coloring books with mono-syllabic word versions of his speeches. You know, for the education impaired.

[boxster]

62. Blind faith is a wonderful thing.

It's amazing how the "new" Dean supporter tactic is to insinuate that anyone who doesn't support Dean is just too stupid to understand that he is to be given complete and total latitude in everything he says. We're to somehow intuit what he means and not what he says.

Dean supporters blindly ignore the stupid things he says. And, yes, the confederate flag comment, if you'd bother to take the blinders off for a moment, was stupid. Even Dean has agreed, as he has apologized and called it both "clumsy" and a "misstatement".

So, obviously, you and your fellow bandwagoners are the only ones who still believe otherwise. Perhaps you should actually listen to what your candidate says for once instead of spouting the company line. You might notice that even Dean acknowledges that he misspoke.

[AlinPA]

22. Texas?! Mississippi?! Alabama?!

further west, Oklahoma?! Kansas?! I just can't see those people voting Democrat in large numbers. Its God, Guns, Gays.

[mermaid]

35. Dang!!

I hadn't even rrad your post yet, when I replied similarly to someone up above.

The four G's of the Southland: God, Guns, Gays, and Government (as in less of it... read:lower taxes, less civil and human rights, less regulation on business, etc, etc, etc.)

What are YOU willing to compromise to get the South? And what will that compromise cost us in terms of more liberal northern voters?

[mermaid]

28. I'll Tell You Why

The South is full of a bunch of brainwashed rednecks that care more about social issues than anything else. And note carefully, I AM A SOUTHERNER!! I know what I'm talking about here, I see it all around me!

Wanna see a Southerner go nuts? Tell him the Democrats plan to take away his guns, ban teaching of creationism in public schools, ban prayer in public schools, allow homosexuals to marry and adopt children, and that they support Affirmative Action!

This is what the Republicans do every election cycle. they do it in code. The code is "State's Rights," "family values," and "Christian morals." Those are the code phrases that activate mind-numbed redneck Southerners.

I'm not kidding! It's true!

Take your average Billy-Joe-Jim-Bob from down South...take away his factory job...let him know Bush is responsible for his economic hardship. Use the code phrases...and he will STILL go back to the polls and put Bush right back in there.

This is a knee-jerk reaction, and there is little we can do to reverse it.

The Presidency can be won without the South. I'd rather not waste good campaign money trying to change hearts and minds that refuse to change. I'd rather us pour the money into OH and FL.

Here's a Republican South Sweep that still gains the Presidency for the Dems...and very plausible...

The Blue Guys (the good guys...us)
We get the following states:

AZ CA CT DC DE HI IL MA MD MI MN NH NJ NM NV NY OR PA RI VT WA WI WV

Final Tally: 272 Electoral Votes

You will notice in the above very-plausible scenario, I did not give either FL or OH to us good guys, and this is, indeed, a Republican sweep of the South.
Now, if we can get MOST of the states I listed above, and can pull out either OH or FL...we got us a lock!

Why throw away good money on the South that will not be converted? Put the money to good use. OH and PA are hurting very badly right now from Bush's policies. Hammer that message.
FL was VERY close last time out, for those who forget. So FL is takable. Especially if we can get by without another effing Ralph Nader to screw things up for us!

I am BEGGING all Greens out there: PLEASE...for God's sake, put your idealism on hold for a little while, here, and help us get Bush outta office! Expressing your idealism right now may wind up giving Bush another four years...and whatever else we may agree or disagree on, I am quite sure we can both agree that four more years of W is NOT an acceptable outcome!

PLEASE, Greens...don't screw us up this time!

[Fleshdancer]

29. Dean For Texas stats:

3,000 Texans rallied for Dean in Austin on June 9th.

2,000 Texans rallied for Dean in Dallas (can't remember date)

3,500 Texans rallied for Dean in San Antonio in August.

Texans have raised over $200,000 for Dean (not including contributions from Texans made directly to the Dean For America website)

Over 25,000 Texans have signed up to join the campaign.

[Adjoran]

31. Write off the south, start planning for 2008

NO Democrat has EVER won the Presidency without carrying at least two southern states. EVER, in over 200 years of running Democratic candidates.

Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, South Carolina - forget them.

We have to look at places we might actually have a chance. Florida, because it was so close last time. Arkansas and Tennessee were pretty close, too. Louisiana has chosen Democrats in the last two statewide elections in 2002 and 2003. We should target resources to those four states, hoping to get the two or three we will absolutely need to win.

Can Dean appeal to those voters? I don't know. But I do know that if we don't carry at least two southern states, history tells us we will not win.

Incidentally, the last Democrats to win without a southerner on the ticket was Truman-Barkley in 1948 - two guys from border states.

[Terwilliger]

39. sure, now how ya gonna attract them without alienating the left?

you know....the party core?

[Padraig18]

41. No offense

I frankly think that the size of 'the left' within the Democratic party is vastly over-estimated both within and without the party. Most of the Democratic party is center and center-left, IMO.

[pezcore64]

42. well

I agree with you.
heh.
The left is just visable at the moment because people want to court them for the primaries...
regardless of the candidate , they will move to the center come general election.
Well, maybe not DK ;)

The rest tho, definitely. Specially that big ole liberal Howard Dean!
lol!

[Padraig18]

43. That 'passionate centrist' liberal? LOL!

It amazes me that people INSIST on mis-labeling him as a liberal, since any time HE gets asked, he describes himself as a 'passionate centrist'. :)

[Terwilliger]

50. who thinks Dean is liberal? would that be right-wingers?

:shrug:

[Padraig18]

57. Umnmm...

I'll not say, so as to promote some civility. :evilgrin: :P

[Terwilliger]

49. center-left...just what is that?

is that like centrist?

Maybe you're right, though, since so many "Democrats" voted for Bush in 00, it's probably true that the Democratic party is not for those on the left.

[Kolesar]

44. The South was "Dixiecrat" even before Nixon

From the 1940s into the 1960s, the Dixiecrats were actually able to win the electoral votes of several southern states in many of the elections.

I don't think that the Democrats have had a lock on the South despite the goodwill and development that was steered to the South in the Great Society days of President Johnson.

Personally, I think our rising star is La Raza.

[Padraig18]

60. My boyfriend would agree with this:

"...Personally, I think our rising star is La Raza...."

He's 1/2 Cuban and 1/2 Mexican, but American-born. :)