The 1964 Civil Rihts Act

[sean miguel]

The 1964 Civil Rights Act Roll Call Vote: In the House, only 64 percent of the Democrats (153 yes, 91 no), but 80 percent of the Republicans (136 yes, 35 no), voted for it. In the Senate, while only 68 percent of the Democrats endorsed the bill (46 yes, 21 no), 82 percent of the Republicans voted to enact it (27 yes, 6 no).


is that true?

Why were more democrats against the civil rights act?

As a minority, I'd like to know, before I vote for Hillary.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Good thread, I bet Jim Beam directed it here and not to P&R where the usually accurate ani normally resides.

Damn you Jim Beam! Damn you straight to hell!

 

[sean miguel]

yes, but I just want to know who to vote for.

I'm so confused.


I want free stuff but I like freedom and stuff.


uea, misplaced thread.

 

[Jack Davenport]

A good portion of those Democrats were Dixiecrats. Strom Thurmond (who later joined the Republican party) and others from the south were totally against the Civil Rights act. Senators like Albert Gore Sr. Fritz Hollings, Robert C. Byrd remained Democrats and were accepted by the Democrat party in spite of their racist transgressions.

The Republican party of that era registered blacks to vote and were more in line with Libertarian thought than the GOP of today. It's an admission I don't take pleasure in making but intellectual honesty requires me to do so. Barry Goldwater moved the base even more to the right which resulted in LBJ being elected after Kennedy's assassination, and more establishment Republicans gained power with the election of Nixon. Nixon gave birth to the establishment base of Bush. Romney's and the drubbing of Goldwater to this day is why a lot of them feel they need to take moderate stances. Although Reagan bucked the trend.

 

[BlkHawk]

A good portion of those Democrats were Dixiecrats. Strom Thurmond (who later joined the Republican party) and others from the south were totally against the Civil Rights act. Senators like Albert Gore Sr. Fritz Hollings, Robert C. Byrd remained Democrats and were accepted by the Democrat party in spite of their racist transgressions.

The Republican party of that era registered blacks to vote and were more in line with Libertarian thought than the GOP of today. It's an admission I don't take pleasure in making but intellectual honesty requires me to do so.

Props for pointing that out. I miss the old Republican party. Anymore I find myself voting third party as the two main ones continually piss me off now.

 

[Jack Davenport]

I made a few additions in my edit. But thanks.

 

[sean miguel]

A good portion of those Democrats were Dixiecrats. Strom Thurmond he later joined the Republican party were totally against the Civil Rights act. Others like Albert Gore Sr. Fritz Hollings, Robert C. Byrd remained Democrats and were accepted by the Democrat party in spite of their racist transgressions.

The Republican party of that era registered blacks to vote and were more in line with Libertarian thought than the GOP of today. It's an admission I don't take pleasure in making but intellectual honesty requires me to do so.

or the racism of lowered expectations which is part and parcel with one party

But I am impressed when Hillary tells me how disadvantaged I am in her feigned appalachian accent.

Hillary it is.

 

[Jack Davenport]

It really is time for Mr. Smith goes to Washington again. About 538 of them.Give or take a few.

 

[Supafly]

I will absolutely say: Back in 1964(My birthyear), if I were as old as I were then, given those circumstances and the parties as they were then, I would be a proud republicaan. That party had - and still has a handful, maybe - great men and women, and it is just sad that they became what they are today. Yet we see, times, they are a-changing, there is always hope.

 

[Johan]

A good portion of those Democrats were Dixiecrats. Strom Thurmond (who later joined the Republican party) and others from the south were totally against the Civil Rights act. Senators like Albert Gore Sr. Fritz Hollings, Robert C. Byrd remained Democrats and were accepted by the Democrat party in spite of their racist transgressions.

Some of them were elected in southerns states (Byrd was from West Virginia, Hollings was from South Carolina, Gore Sr was from Tennessee, Eastland and Stennis were from Mississippi). We know that, back in the days, southern states used to vote for the racist candidates, wether they are Republicans or Democrats

 

[Jack Davenport]

Some of them were elected in southerns states (Byrd was from West Virginia, Hollings was from South Carolina, Gore Sr was from Tennessee, Eastland and Stennis were from Mississippi). We know that, back in the days, southern states used to vote for the racist candidates, wether they are Republicans or Democrats

You really are very simple minded. I realize you have an interest in American politics, but racism was not necessarily their motivation. They voted how their constituents elected them to vote. Segregation was far more than just racism in southern states, they were only 100 years removed from slavery.having to send their children to school with black kids, eat at the same places with black people, the same people who were their slaves only 2 or 3 generations before them. You can't disrupt a way of life through forced government intervention or 9 people in a room making the decision without blowback.

Was the Civil Rights act the correct decision? Yes, but the people against it weren't necessarily evil or cruel, just misinformed. Their lives changed through legislative and judicial mandate at breakneck speed. It is human nature to resist change that makes you uncomfortable.

 

[knowone]

Upon signing the Act President LBJ said "We are losing the South for a Generation." He knew that a lot of Dixiecrats would switch parties.

 

[georges]

You really are very simple minded. I realize you have an interest in American politics, but racism was not necessarily their motivation. They voted how their constituents elected them to vote. Segregation was far more than just racism in southern states, they were only 100 years removed from slavery.having to send their children to school with black kids, eat at the same places with black people, the same people who were their slaves only 2 or 3 generations before them. You can't disrupt a way of life through forced government intervention or 9 people in a room making the decision without blowback.

Was the Civil Rights act the correct decision? Yes, but the people against it weren't necessarily evil or cruel, just misinformed. Their lives changed through legislative and judicial mandate at breakneck speed. It is human nature to resist change that makes you uncomfortable.

Don't expect much from a quite uninformed socialist like him and someone who has no ties to America and no relatives living there

 

[spacearrow99]

You really are very simple minded. I realize you have an interest in American politics, but racism was not necessarily their motivation. They voted how their constituents elected them to vote. Segregation was far more than just racism in southern states, they were only 100 years removed from slavery.having to send their children to school with black kids, eat at the same places with black people, the same people who were their slaves only 2 or 3 generations before them. You can't disrupt a way of life through forced government intervention or 9 people in a room making the decision without blowback.

Was the Civil Rights act the correct decision? Yes, but the people against it weren't necessarily evil or cruel, just misinformed. Their lives changed through legislative and judicial mandate at breakneck speed. It is human nature to resist change that makes you uncomfortable.

All family members who lived in the South during that time, would call your explanations for segregation bullshit.

 

[Jack Davenport]

All family members who lived in the South during that time, would call your explanations for segregation bullshit.

As a southerner born and raised in the south, who experienced some of the first rounds of busing in my state and whose direct family members can talk about the experience as if it were yesterday, I can say without hesitation that you are a god damned idiot. Are you even an American? Specifically a southern American? And what the hell do you mean by "family members"? Don't you have a 300 paragraph post about Russian airpower over Syria to grace us with right about now?

 

[spacearrow99]

As a southerner born and raised in the south, who experienced some of the first rounds of busing in my state and whose direct family members can talk about the experience as if it were yesterday, I can say without hesitation that you are a god damned idiot. Are you even an American? Specifically a southern American? And what the hell do you mean by "family members"? Don't you have a 300 paragraph post about Russian airpower over Syria to grace us with right about now?

You can talk about what happened in just your state. I have serviced in Iraq and Afghanistan unlike yourself. You would not understand my post about Russian airpower over Syria.

 

[Jack Davenport]

You can talk about what happened in just your state. I have serviced in Iraq and Afghanistan unlike yourself. You would understand my post about Russian airpower over Syria.

What happened in my state were not isolated incidences exclusive to my state. This was a regional series of events and societal evolution. And like it or not, right or wrong the south experienced it together as it effected this region of the USA the most and is also where it met the majority of resistance. I stand by my evaluation of segregation and eventual integration and southerners reaction to it. I experienced it firsthand. Like you experienced deployment in a theater of war. I didn't excuse their reaction, I simply explained why they reacted like they did. BTW the Sukhoi PAK-FA is a piece of shit, and it's inspiration, the F-22 Raptor would pummel it one on one. #Thrust Vectoring # Non-Afterburner Supersonic Cruising Motherfuckers

 

[Straight Shooter]

A good portion of those Democrats were Dixiecrats. Strom Thurmond (who later joined the Republican party) and others from the south were totally against the Civil Rights act. Senators like Albert Gore Sr. Fritz Hollings, Robert C. Byrd remained Democrats and were accepted by the Democrat party in spite of their racist transgressions.

The Republican party of that era registered blacks to vote and were more in line with Libertarian thought than the GOP of today. It's an admission I don't take pleasure in making but intellectual honesty requires me to do so. Barry Goldwater moved the base even more to the right which resulted in LBJ being elected after Kennedy's assassination, and more establishment Republicans gained power with the election of Nixon. Nixon gave birth to the establishment base of Bush. Romney's and the drubbing of Goldwater to this day is why a lot of them feel they need to take moderate stances. Although Reagan bucked the trend.

Good explanation. It's also important to know that just because you're a Democrat, that doesn't neccesarily mean you're liberal. Just like you can be a Republican but not necessarily be a conservative. People too often confuse Democrat/liberal and Republican/conservative. We used to have conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans in this country but those people don't exist anymore