So there are no longer any southern states with democratic senators. Goes to show ya.

[SummerSnow]

Modern day mason dixon line


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/05/upshot/demise-of-the-southern-democrat-is-now-nearly-compete.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1

[MFrohike]

1. There's one thought

Of course, it could be also be a collection of weak candidates challenged effectively by a motivated opposition party not burdened with the baggage of a weak response to the worst economic calamity in 80 years. But hey, let's go with the idea that dumps on the south. That's always a winner.

[BillZBubb]

4. The south deserves to be dumped on.

They blindly buy the baloney the right sells them, no matter how badly it reeks.

[MFrohike]

7. Comedy

Nothing quite as funny as Yankees bitching about the south and missing the right wing in their own backyard.

[brer cat]

30. And that obviously applies to southerners and no one else

which is why the entire country is blue except for the south.

[cordelia]

39. Of course! Didn't you know?

There's not a single solitary conservative north of the Mason Dixon.

Oh wait.

Paul Ryan, Scott Walker, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin. . . .

[rpannier]

47. For you...

I posted this to the person above you

Utah, Wyoming and Idaho (Idaho is considered the reddest state in the country, though I think it's Wyoming)

[rpannier]

46. Utah, Wyoming, Idaho

nt

[Odin2005]

69. Up here the RW loonies are a mainly rural phenomenon.

Southern loonies are mainstream everywhere except the majority Black areas.

[DanTex]

5. Well, that, along with the fact that the South is very conservative.

There's really no getting around that.

[MFrohike]

9. Is it?

I often wonder if it's innate conservatism or just inertia. The right really hasn't faced a strong challenge here in a very long time. I have to wonder what a sustained, energetic campaign across the region could achieve.

[DanTex]

10. I used to live in Texas. Now I live in NYC. Texas is a lot more conservative than NYC.

I don't know too much about the rest of the South (is Texas really part of "the South"?), but Texas conservatism isn't just inertia.

[MFrohike]

14. Oh?

Are you including the absolute, unquestioning subservience to Wall Street and finance generally?

[DanTex]

19. Absolutely. Economically, people in NYC are much more liberal than in Texas.

Financial regulation is no exception. Occupy started in NYC, remember.

[MFrohike]

24. And Mario Cuomo is governor

I also remember that Occupy was started by Canadians and broad swathe of Americans, not New Yorkers.

[DanTex]

26. A breath of fresh air coming from Rick Perry. Plus Bill De Blasio is mayor.

[MFrohike]

27. Personally, I'd prefer Perry

I like the wolf without the clothing.

[DanTex]

32. Well, there you have it.

Presumably you're not gay, or a woman who might need an abortion, or a poor person who might need Medicaid, or...

[MFrohike]

36. Oh hey, the parade of sanctimony

I do love it when people update the hits. Unfortunately, it doesn't work on me. I'm not interested in Andrew (got it right this time!) Cuomo's noblesse oblige toward us poor serfs. I'm more interested in elected representatives who aren't on the take and can actually work to curb the endemic corruption at all levels of American society. Without doing that, the things you mentioned will always be in danger. Rather than depend on the charity of the elite, I'd prefer to see Americans making enough money to defend their own rights from the rapaciousness of the wealthy and deranged, not dependent on the whims of officeholders. Given that, it's easier to draw a distinction when the wolf is dressed as a wolf than when he comes out in wool.

[DanTex]

37. Yes, because concern about abortion, gay rights, and healthcare is just so "sanctimonious".

Funny, here we are talking about whether the South is really more conservative, and you come out with the Perry is better than Cuomo line. That's pretty much the point I was making. Is there any policy area at all where Perry is to the left of Cuomo? For example, if you'd like to see Americans "making enough money to defend their own rights from the rapaciousness of the wealthy and deranged", reason would dictate that you'd prefer NYs higher minimum wage versus TX keeping it pegged at the federal minimum. But, hey, don't let actual policies get in the way of empty rhetorical rants about wolves.

Like I said, you're probably not on minimum wage. You're probably not gay. You're probably not a woman who might need an abortion. You probably weren't affected by the lack of Medicaid expansion. It's sure fun to bang on the keyboard though.

[MFrohike]

40. Strut on, partner

Nice rant, but the deliberate ignorance regarding sanctimony loses you a couple of points. The bit where you completely ignore the comparison of Perry and Cuomo as a pair of wolves also hurts a little. Otherwise, not bad.

Couple of other points.

NY's minimum wage is $8. Sure, it's more than Texas, but it's not exactly in bragging territory. The extra 30 bucks a week, assuming full-time, definitely helps, but is it offset by the cost of living and the tax rates? One does have to wonder.

The sanctimonious bit is getting a bit old. It's sanctimonious because you're trying to wipe away legitimate criticism of a thoroughly corrupt politician by claiming that he's done a few nice things. I'm glad that he's not a raging homophobe, obsessed with women's bodies, and was smarter than shower mold (unlike Perry and a lot of others) when it came to taking federal money for a basic human right. That's all great. It doesn't change the fact he's also notoriously ambivalent on the fracking issue and is a willing tool for the financial industry, and the wealthy in general. That sort of thing tends to outweigh the good because it will inevitably erode the good he's done. It might feel good to try to discredit me by burnishing your liberal concerns for the serfs, while intimating that I have no such concerns, but it's pointless. You're still defending a scumbag.

As for the last bit, haha. You really have no clue one way or the other, so it taints your entire post with false concern when you assume I'm not. If I'm in any of those categories, why should I believe you care about any of it when you're so free to belittle others in order to burnish your own credentials?

[DanTex]

45. Well, you're not the first person I've come across who prefers Rick Perry to Andrew Cuomo.

Like I said, I used to live in Texas. People there are more conservative than they are here. So, yeah, I've heard it before.

[MFrohike]

49. Beat that dead horse

You care to add the part about preferring wolves without the hypocritical costumes or are you trying for sanctimonious all-star?

[truebluegreen]

28. I largely agree with you, but it's Andrew Cuomo, not Mario.

Not at all the same thing.

[MFrohike]

29. And now I feel like an idiot

Thanks for the correction.

[truebluegreen]

33. S'okay...happens to everybody.

[Raine1967]

54. ANDREW Cuomo… just saying'

Mario was a solid Dem.

his son, not so much. I'll be honest, I wish Mario ran for POTUS.
Not for nothing, but if you are gonna be smacking around the *Yankees* get the governor of the state you wanna smack right.

[MFrohike]

55. I know, I know

Mea culpa, mea culpa!

[former9thward]

68. Andrew Cuomo is governor.

Much different than his father Mario.

[VanillaRhapsody]

38. innate racism...

[MFrohike]

41. Cool

Simple answers are fun, even if they're almost always wrong.

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. Oh you think so?

Pretty much every Republican voter I ever met in the South is racist....but of course you know better than someone who lived in the South for most of her life.

[MFrohike]

48. Again, cool

Again, simple answers are fun but mostly useless.

[VanillaRhapsody]

50. unless those simple answers are simply true...

[MFrohike]

52. There's a thought

Of course, if racism were the total story, one does wonder how she ever got elected in the first place. Or Bobby Jindal, for that matter.

[cordelia]

42. You're saying the ENTIRE South is racist?

That's how it reads.

[VanillaRhapsody]

44. the poor Republicans...yep! I'm saying that...

what is it YOU think they are "Conserving"?

[cordelia]

56. Be clearer next time - that brush you swing is mighty broad.

[Odin2005]

70. 4 out ot of 5 whites in the deep South vote Republican.

Don't tell me they ain't racist.

[Recursion]

58. Yes

I have to wonder what a sustained, energetic campaign across the region could achieve.

I love your blithe assumption that Democrats haven't run sustained, energetic campaigns across the South.

[MFrohike]

64. That's a fair point

I was really thinking of something like the Moral Mondays that have popped up the last couple of years. I didn't really mean an election campaign, but a long-term political campaign, like the right's since McCarthy, to change the nature of southern politics. By and large, it seems the state parties do what they can, but, outside of a particular candidate or faction, there doesn't seem to have been a real old-style Democratic movement, for lack of a better word, in a long time. I may well be wrong about this. I'm just offering a counterpoint to the assumption that a region that has been known for its radicalism at times is somehow this right-wing hellhole.

[Recursion]

66. The moral mondays, that happened in NC, where Hagan just lost?

They were a perfect example of what I was thinking of.

Organizing is important and good, but it can lead people to think there are more of us than there actually are.

[MFrohike]

77. Not exactly

Hagan's loss is in large part on the sheer volume of money spent over almost 2 years to beat her. The first anti-Hagan commercials began in early 2013, around March I think. It took tens of millions of dollars to elect Tillis, a guy whose staff was literally humping lobbyists in Raleigh, because he was an albatross without a massive payout for advertising.

Taking all that in stride, I said I didn't mean an election campaign. I'm talking about years of effort. I don't see any other way to change the political climate without changing the language that is used. No election campaign will do that because, without sustained pressure, elected officials will always gravitate to the rich and powerful. That type of struggle will take time and lose a lot. Civil rights took 100 years. Labor rights took 70. It'd be nice to speed up the timetable, but it's unlikely.

I'm not sure who thinks there are more of us. I'm sure the confusion is all mine, so please explain.

[demosincebirth]

60. Half of the population in the south doesn't know what conervative means. They just don't like

blacks, immigrants, and government social (ism) programs, which maybe, 50% of whites live on.

[JI7]

6. so you don't think race had anything to do with it ?

[MFrohike]

12. In Louisiana?

Of course it did. It was a big part, but it wasn't everything. After all, it was a very close race.

[JI7]

13. it wasn't close at all

[MFrohike]

17. She lost in a runoff

That's a close race.

[JI7]

20. no it was not close at all

If was a runoff because no individual got majority in November but combined republican totals were a large majority.

And the republican won huge this time

[MFrohike]

21. Ok

If it was that bad, why didn't she just concede last month?

[JI7]

23. because she wanted to try to win

But it was clear from the results she had little chance and might have taken a scandal on the republican side for her to have a chance.

But even then as we saw with vitter the scandal may not hurt him

[truebluegreen]

31. It was a three-way race

and once the third-place finisher was out there was no doubt. She lost by 14 points.

[JI7]

61. it was not a 3 way race, the first election had like 8 candidates running

about half were republicans+a libertarian and half were democrats.

the republicans+libertarian got more than 50 percent support combined. the democrats got just about 45 percent and almost all of that went to landrieu.

since no individual got majority, the top 2 vote candidates faced the runoff where landrieu got about the same percentage as she got the first time around with large majority voting for the teabagger.

[Yupster]

65. Really was a three man race though

Landreau got 42 %
Cassidy got 41 %
Maness got 14 %

about eight other candidates split the remaining 3 %

I think the race ended when Cassidy and Maness had dinner a day or two after the election and Maness enthusiastically backed Cassidy. That was really the end.

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. ....

[LuvNewcastle]

2. The GOP has been playing cutthroat politics down here my whole life.

Now that they finally have everything they want, let's see what they do. Without the evil Democrats to fight anymore, I expect they'll turn on one another. I've already seen some of that happen in my area. I'm just going to sit back and laugh. That's really all I can do.

[SummerSnow]

3. It will explode . Then in a few years they will be voting in Dems.

[JCMach1]

8. ummmmmm Kansas...

Not hopeful...

[Alittleliberal]

35. They still have 2 years to blame Obama :( nt

[GeorgeGist]

11. Florida is not a southern state?

[madville]

15. Or Virginia?

that caught my attention

[alp227]

16. from article

Today, nearly all of the Democrats holding federal or statewide office in the South will represent so-called “majority-minority” districts or areas with a large number of new residents from outside the region. In the states of the former Confederacy, Democrats will control Senate seats or governors’ mansions only in Virginia and Florida. Not coincidentally, those are the two Southern states where people born outside the state represent a majority of the population. These Democrats bear little resemblance to the Southern Democrats who won by attracting conservative white voters.

[madville]

18. And the South will continue to gain House seats

Just like after the 2010 census, I believe Texas and Florida gained a few House seats from Northeast blue states like NY and PA or something. The 2020 census will be more of that as people continue to leave Northeastern blue states and head South, so the influence from down here will continue to increase.

[kelliekat44]

63. Only if gerrymandering is unfettered AND Dems refuse to vote in state and local elections will this

hurt the Dems. The numbers should be on our side.

[BootinUp]

22. Lets Party

[Omaha Steve]

25. LBJ predicted losing the South when he signed the Voting Rights Act

It still is a factor.

[truebluegreen]

34. Yup. Although he predicted it for "a generation".

Nixon and Reagan and dog-whistle politics perpetuated the problem.

[madville]

72. And they use it as an excuse to gerrymander

By setting up 1 Black congressional district for about every 3 or 4 Republican ones. Corrine Brown, the Black Democrat here, was using it to argue why the gerrymandering should stay in place. Judge ruled against her and bye Republicans though, they have to redraw some lines.

[zipplewrath]

78. Guess he shouldn't have been so concerned about purity

What was he thinking forcing democratic senators to have to defend something like the voters rights act in the south. I guess he valued purity over winning. Heck, it was running rampant back then. Do you realize the democratic party force the southern states to integrate their convention delegations? What kind of purity idiocy was that anyway? How many elections did they lose over something like that? They should have moved more to the right and supported the state parties that knew their own constituencies.

[B Calm]

53. According to a few here in DU we need to run candidates even more right-wing than Landrieu to win

in the south. .

One hell of winning strategy they got ehh.

[Recursion]

57. Err... did Florida and Virginia leave the South? (nt)

[madfloridian]

59. Bill Nelson, FL

He's a conservative Democrat, very much so.

[Tsiyu]

62. Yup

Southern voters apparently haven't seen the maps that show their region continually losing ground in all key markers of living standards.

From people's rotting teeth to draconian drug laws, overcrowded prisons, failing schools to below-poverty-level wages, the South is going backward while the rest of the nation rebounds.

But many, many Southerners hate that dude in the White House more than they love their own children. The Democrats I know all joke that if Obama were to go on camera and social media and claim that breathing is good for you, we'd find the majority of Southerners would be cold, blue and dead within minutes.

They don't want success here as long as that n***** is in the white house.

This is what true ignorance looks like.

[Odin2005]

67. The Deep South is beyond saving.

Voting down there is almost entirely on racial lines, 4 out of 5 whites vote Republican.

I say we evacuate all the Southern progressives and let the bigots stew in their own shit-pile.

Edit: or else force a coercive social revolution that completely destroy "southern culture" and replace it with Northern cultural norms.

[LuvNewcastle]

75. I'm ready to be evacuated.

Y'all can come down and get me anytime, especially if you live on the West Coast.

[Matrosov]

71. South = racist cesspool

As someone who has lived in the deep South for most of his life I should be used to all the hateful garbage I hear out of the mouths of people around me every day, and yet I continue to be surprised and shocked after all these years. Democrats electing an African-American president has been a huge source of hate for them. I thought they acted crazy when President Clinton was in office, but the hatred and the paranoia have been in overdrive since 2008.

Why are Democrats having a tough time in the South? Because of African-Americans, Latinos, gays, transgendered, atheists, Muslims, undocumented migrants, communists, socialists, and of course a Kenyan-born President who secretly follows Islam and wants to purge the country of white people. At least that's what Republicans in the deep South will tell you.

[RandiFan1290]

73. 'publicons keep saying it

but it isn't true.

[mmonk]

74. What are the other states' excuse?

[uponit7771]

76. No 50 state strategy... the DNC has the resources