MovieChat Forums > Politics > Rioting helps Republicans

Rioting helps Republicans


The party of law and order

Before the horrific video, there were several articles speculating that Minnesota, a long-time blue state, might turn Republican in 2020.

The rioting/burning/looting in that state will most certainly turn voters away from the Democratic party.

This has happened before in history. A great wellspring of empathy after MLKs death was a boon to Democrats in the 1960's .This empathy was short lived, as some blacks became more militaristic and anarchical in nature (black panther party) along with the chaos at the Democratic convention, which helped elect a law and order President, Richard Nixon.

reply

"as some blacks became more militaristic and anarchical in nature (black panther party) along with the chaos at the Democratic convention, which helped elect a law and order President, Richard Nixon."

This is such a gross oversimplification that leaves out so much important context as to why Nixon beat Humphrey in '68 that I'd have to say it's borderline false.

1968 was such a tumultuous year and major realignment in American politics because of the Civil Rights Act LBJ signed into law. All the racist southern Dixiecrats exited the Democratic party en masse to the Republican party and the New Deal coalition that had existed since the 1930s was dead. LBJ dropped out of the primaries after New Hampshire and the leading Democratic frontrunner, RFK, was assassinated. The left was split because the eventual Dem nominee Humphries was seen as a moderate and a warmonger. His nomination ignited massive antiwar protests.

So yes, Nixon promised to restore law and order after the massive rioting happened after MLKs death. That much is true and it helped his campaign. But left was split, and the one figure who could have united the left, RFK, was gunned down. Humphrey could not thread the needle.

But if you're trying to compare it to the present situation in my opinion it's quite a bit different. Right now, many see Trump as the igniter-in-chief responsible for the volatility of the present circumstances. Whereas Nixon was seen as having a steady hand who could restore order, Trump is seen as a destroyer.

It's not the same.

reply

Interesting history there. I'm surprised the now Republicans allowed them in when they fought so hard against slavery during the civil war (among other things).

reply

Trump is also a man who is trying to limit immigration. Political watchers noticed that assimilation from legal and illegal immigration are not going well in Minnesota. The state is overwhelmingly white and the immigrants mostly kept to themselves and their culture intact in pockets, not mixing or fitting in well with the overall culture of a Minnesotan. Minnesota is not California or Los Angeles, and it doesn't want to be. The sight of minorities burning the cities will make the vast pool white voters in the state even more xenophobic and vote for congressman and woman who will limit immigration.

reply

"Trump is also a man who is trying to limit immigration."

Bullshit.

Who's picking the grapes at his winery this year?

reply

All the racist southern Dixiecrats exited the Democratic party en masse

Old debunked Democrat lie. Apart from Strom Thurmond the segregationist Democrats remained Democrats their whole lives. For example Robert Byrd (former KKK member and Democrat Senate majority leader), William Fulbright (Clinton's mentor), Al Gore Sr., etc.. Even the literal Dixiecrat himself, George Wallace, returned to the Democratic Party. Most of them were liberals anyway. Woodrow Wilson, the "progressive" icon and first modern liberal president, was a virulent bigot who resegregated the federal government after Republicans had desegregated it. The Democrat segregationists supported FDR's New Deal, favored high taxes and welfare, and embraced leftist populist rhetoric against banks. Studies have shown that in the early to mid 20th Century the Democrat segregationists in the US Congress voted with the national party on every issue except race and sometimes labor relations.

By contrast Republicans freed the slaves and have always opposed racial discrimination, up through and past Newt Gingrich pushing through a law ending racial discrimination in adoption in the 1990s.

There was a partial geographical realignment, but it was gradual as southerners realized they had more in common with GOP values on non racial issues (especially religion and national defense, though liberal economic populism sometimes gained traction there). Texas and other states started voting Republican at times as early as the 1920s. Half the South voted for Eisenhower in the 1950s, even as Democrat Senator LBJ was doing things like blocking the GOP's Civil Rights Act of 1957. The South swung back and forth through the late 20th Century and wasn't solidly Republican until the 2000s. Calling millions of people "racist" simply because of where they live ironically reveals your ignorant prejudice.

Multiple generations have grown up since the 1960s. Some traditional values have remained but things have changed wildly on the racial front. The truth is the South is the least bigoted region of 21th Century America.

And Republican strength in the South has always been inversely proportional to the importance of race as an issue. More should also be said about New England ideologically shifting to the left from the 1970s on after centuries of the region being famous for conservative/libertarian sentiment and fiscal policies.

reply

Is that what John Solomon taught you?

I bet you'd call Nixon's racist southern strategy to appeal to racist dixiecrats a Dem lie too wouldn't you? Oh yeah, but as a Solomon cabalist you wouldn't know anything about that. Lee Atwater admitted to all of it on his deathbed. I was talking about voting coalitions dumbfuck, not politicians. Nixon won deploying the southern strategy by peeling away dixiecrats from voting for Humphries.

You brainwashed cultists are such a joke with your alternative versions of history. As usual, your stupidity trumps all.

reply

😄 I utterly destroy your previous post with detailed factual evidence and that pathetic retort is the best you can muster? I debunked your lie that "racist southern Dixiecrats exited the Democratic party en masse to the Republican party" by pointing out that virtually all the racist southern Dixiecrats, including the most famous Dixiecrat, their presidential candidate George Wallace himself, stayed in the Democratic Party their whole lives. As for "voters", I guessed you missed me educate you about the gradual southern realignment that started when Democrats were still the party of Jim Crow (Republicans always opposed racial discrimination) and didn't finish until the 2000s.

Being a moron, you just toss in other debunked DNC talking points like "Solomon!" (WTF? 😄) and "southern strategy". Nixon's "southern strategy" was about appealing to southerners on non-racial issues, an opportunity created by the CRA taking race off the table. Democrats distorted the truth to provide an excuse for their huge losses in the 1970s and 80s, like the debunked Russia Collusion BS conspiracy theory they wasted three years of the nation's time pushing. Nixon presided over the bulk of desegregation in the country (good) and even started affirmative action (bad). Unlike you, who uncritically swallows lies partisan blogs feed you, I've actually listened to primary source audio footage of Lee Atwater interviews. He boasted about the 1980s seeing a generation of Southerners reaching adulthood who weren't bigoted. .

As on other topics, you don't know what you're talking about.

reply

Damn! You are owned again. Drink some water and take another defeat lap.

reply

You said to a mirror, you witless clown. I must have really pissed you off by inflicting those recent ass stompings on you. You've followed me around to several threads in the past 24 hours to spew the same empty BS. 😄

PS - I know imitation is a form of flattery, but FYI me telling you to take a "defeat lap" works because I've just defeated you. It doesn't work if you just say it randomly because you're upset. Thank you for confirming it gets under your skin though. 😀

reply

You must be exhausted and dehydrated from your defeat laps. You’re babbling on incoherently. A trip to the ER May do you some good.

reply

😄 You still haven't made a single substantive point, or picked up where BBS failed.

Take another defeat lap.

reply

Oh yes he has. The pathetic thing is you are too dumb to realize it.

reply

Another butthurt moron bitterly following me after getting a humiliating trouncing on another thread. 😀

Cite the "substantive point" doggiedunce made here. You know, a specific historical fact or at least a cogent historical point.

reply

I will once you prove I condone rioting.

reply

LOL! So you can't even name one? I accept your concession.

Your next assignment is to link to a post of you condemning the rioting. Just one.

reply

Oh I can I just won't until you prove I called a you racist. Your concession is noted.

Nope I don't dance to your music. Your assignment is to point to to me condoning rioting just one. I will wait.

reply

Oh I can I just won't

😄 So you can't name a single substantive comment from doggiedaddy in the historical debate here and you can't link to a single post of you condemning the riots.

Got it. You're dumb but stubborn enough to make a nice metaphorical punching bag.

reply

You can't link me to one post of me condoning riots. Nor me calling you a racist. Two claims you made but can't backup.

Got it you are a guy who can't debate to save his life.

reply

😄 I'm not sure if you're really this stupid or just putting on some kind of performance art, you faceplanting buffoon. For the record you still haven't provided a quote of me quoting you calling me "racist".

At least we apparently agree I'm not "racist".

reply

You haven't provided a quote from me condoning rioting. So lol you are not leading by example. Hold yourself to the same standards you hold everybody else. I never called you racist. I called you a bigot. Are you seriously this ignorant?

At least we I agree I don't condone rioting.

reply

I condemn bigotry all the time, but you haven't condemned the riots, moron.

reply

Nice try but I've never condoned rioting.

reply

It might happen in real life they want Omar gone. I don't think though this will make them republican. I think the last time they voted was for Nixon.When the demographics of who runs for president changes then maybe that state will also.It will be Nikki Haley running against whoever Biden picked for his VP he lost with.

reply

Yep. It sure was smart of Trump to pick all Democrat controlled cities where he knew the Democrats who’ve run these cities for a half a century would let the violence and looting go without any resistance.

He even dressed his provocateurs to look exactly like Soros’ Antifa and had them carrying the usual preprinted “international Communist workers party for freedom” signs. Trump is brilliant.

Only the dumbshit left could have reality served to them on a silver platter and they still f it up.

At least these kids figured out they’re being played.


Atlanta. Someone left a pallet of bricks on the street just in time for tonight’s party, I mean protest.

https://twitter.com/freeyourmindkid/status/1266633662503759873?s=21

reply

Too perfect to be organic.

reply

Did the OP just call Nixon a law and order president?? LOL!

I disagree with the OP's assessment re: Nixon's win. Sen. Robert Kennedy was the democratic candidate until he was assassinated. McGovern ran a very short last-minute campaign. He was also against the Vietnam War which was an extremely controversial stance to have at the time. That doomed him since members of his own party refused to support him. it didn't help that his VP pick had received electric shock therapy for a mental disorder.

reply

He did. Any need to correct him on that ? Nahhhh....let him live in his fantasy land.

reply

People in foreign countries understand there is a serous problem with racism and police brutality in the U.S.. There is a disconnect with some Americans, though. A problem can't be fixed if it's not acknowledged.

reply

Exactly ! If it's not acknowledged, it doesn't exist with them. And whatever you do - don't accuse them of being racist, because they once had a black co-worker. So there!

reply

I love watching krl97a get owned - and then says how she won! 🤣

reply

Wrong election... McGovern ran in '72, not '68.

reply

He ran in both '68 and '72. He ran against Nixon in '72.

Different times now. Nobody believes Trump represents law and order. And he incites violence with his dopey tweets.

reply

He ran for the nomination in '68, I guess. Unless he ran as third party candidate in '68. Not my era so I'm not sue.

reply

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiKcXdh5nqk (3:40 Punk; 4:05 Soyboy; 7:26 Karen)

I mean just watch the whole clip. It's like liberal educated lefties that took courses in African/Indigenous studies and liberal arts. I think I see a lot of Karen's among in the group as well. A mixture of punks/hooligans/hippies/degenerates etc. rolled in one.

reply

Are you saying that whites shouldn't fight for justice?

reply

Check the Keys to the White House. It’s the best model to predict Presidential winners. It even predicted Trump’s election in 2016.

One of the 13 keys states that long social unrest hurts the incumbent party.

Republicans were not the incumbents in 1968.

Aside from that, you can turn that argument around.

We had the 1992 Rodney King riots and Republicans lost California and the election to Democrats.

Trump ran as the Law and Order candidate in 2016 because of social unrest back then. Now, three and a half years later, social unrest is higher than it’s ever been this Century.

Clearly Trump has failed to bring law and order to the U.S. These protest will hurt him.

reply

My main thought on the post was Minnesota, which has been blue for along time

reply

In 2016, I might agree with you. But I don’t see Minnesota turning red with everything that is going on.

reply

It's quite possible. Even if the remaining officers are rounded up, the damage is done. Trump, Barr, and their enablers will use this for another 'American Carnage' styled campaign and get moderates to vote for Trump. Which may work since where the hell has Biden been at?

reply

I saw him on PBS, I think he was in his home.

A factor for moderates is Covid-19, and the survivability of a candidate is one gets it.

While Trump is 70, he seems fearless and unconcerned about contracting it. Biden's at 75 is just not showing his face enough, which gives the impression that contracting it is a major concern for him.

reply

Since you're contrasting historic people and events it's a fair assessment that Trump is every bit like Lyndon Baines Johnson right now NOT Richard Nixon.

Nixon actually had a political background and history in D.C. as VP under Ike. Trump has none of that and his bizarro and very 3rd World Dictator-like decree today he comes across like Mussolini or Ceacescu

reply

LBJ was a dove at home and hard abroad... the reason he stayed in Vietnam was his profound belief that he could not get re-elected as a dove in both worlds.

Trump is hard at home and somewhat of a dove abroad ( he does not want a foreign war)

Again, my post was mostly about Minnesota, which I think has a high chance of turning red. Most older white voters prize law and order. Minnesota is full of them.

reply

Trump "the Dove" has been actively waging war with Iran in cahoots with the Sauds and Israelis and isn't afraid to bomb Somalia or inner Africa for Big Oil. He's no Dove abroad.

Minnesota is full of but not overly populated with rural whites. They're the same type of whites you find in the Dakotas, Wisconsin, and Nebraska but they're not the majority and they don't live where the protests are taking place.

Sounds more like wishful thinking from you.

reply