Git Sum Presidentin' (Republican primaries)

---By today standards... Goldwater was a screaming Liberal. Then he was the ultimate conservative. He also thought government should allow women to have the right to chose and not meddle in personal matters. .

--If what you said was true that he hates this country... why in world would he want to be president.... by the way he was not born in Kenya either. His parents were students at the Un. of Hawaii .... records would show that too. I don't agree with everything he has said... (absolutely not late term abortions for example if your comment is true) but so much is said about him that isn't true anyway... Islamic, Kenya, went to Medrasa, etc, .. and you seem to believe everything that you want to be true... even if it isn't. .

---LBJ was whole lot more liberal than everyone on your list... he supported and got Civil Rights laws passed.... [he thought minorities and women should be treated fairly like most humans] At that point the South went pretty much GOP. How in the world does Carter make that list... ??? He was even extremely religious and fits into the Christian Right more than Reagan or either Bush. As for financially conservative, Bush increased the national nearly 100% from about $5.5 trillion to nearly $11 trillion... Clinton era increased it less than 2% per year... check it out if you doubt me. Learn the truth... not believe some Rush Limbaugh type comment.

There are better places but this will do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

..

The South didn't come close to going Republican until Reagan came along and the conservative wing of the democrat party was told they were not welcome in the party anymore.

The South absolutely did not go republican because of being driven away by LBJ.

---By today standards... Goldwater was a screaming Liberal. Then he was the ultimate conservative. He also thought government should allow women to have the right to chose and not meddle in personal matters. .

--If what you said was true that he hates this country... why in world would he want to be president.... by the way he was not born in Kenya either. His parents were students at the Un. of Hawaii .... records would show that too. I don't agree with everything he has said... (absolutely not late term abortions for example if your comment is true) but so much is said about him that isn't true anyway... Islamic, Kenya, went to Medrasa, etc, .. and you seem to believe everything that you want to be true... even if it isn't. .

---LBJ was whole lot more liberal than everyone on your list... he supported and got Civil Rights laws passed.... [he thought minorities and women should be treated fairly like most humans] At that point the South went pretty much GOP. How in the world does Carter make that list... ??? He was even extremely religious and fits into the Christian Right more than Reagan or either Bush. As for financially conservative, Bush increased the national nearly 100% from about $5.5 trillion to nearly $11 trillion... Clinton era increased it less than 2% per year... check it out if you doubt me. Learn the truth... not believe some Rush Limbaugh type comment.

There are better places but this will do.

http://en.wikipedia....tes_public_debt

..

Wikipedia? Seriously? You do know how Wiki works, right? Here I give you props about even knowing anything about SOPA and you come abck with more Comedy central. Just where do you get all your stuff?

The South absolutely did not go republican because of being driven away by LBJ.

That's exactly what happened. Civil Rights was pretty much the catalyst for the flipping of the southern states. Nixon's southern strategy 8 years later helped solidify it. Doesn't make the Democrats any better or the Republicans any worse of a party, its just what happened.

Wikipedia? Seriously? You do know how Wiki works, right? Here I give you props about even knowing anything about SOPA and you come abck with more Comedy central. Just where do you get all your stuff?

Me and Screaming Eagle aren't the same person...

Revised New Hampshire Predictions:

Romney - 44%

Paul - 22%

Santorum- 13%

Huntsman - 9%

Gingrich - 7%

Perry - 4%

So, are you going to pat yourself on the back again when your 9th revisement of the New Hampshire predictions, which you post the morning after the election, is "dead on"?

So, are you going to pat yourself on the back again when your 9th revisement of the New Hampshire predictions, which you post the morning after the election, is "dead on"?

Check the timestamp brah, that prediction was made an hour before the caucus began. And every political pundit revises their predictions until the last minute because things change on a whim. Between now and Tuesday Newt Gingrich could skinny dip in the Hudson River, and Rick Perry could cure cancer. You just never know man.

That's exactly what happened. Civil Rights was pretty much the catalyst for the flipping of the southern states. Nixon's southern strategy 8 years later helped solidify it. Doesn't make the Democrats any better or the Republicans any worse of a party, its just what happened.

Wow. Talk about your revisionist history.

Nixon carries 49 states

Nixon carried 49.... FORTY NINE... of the states in the 1972 election. I guess, by your determination, LBJ turned all of America republican. F O R T Y N I N E S T A T E S!!!!

It's pretty clear that the democrats just ran a really crappy candidate that year and this has nothing to do with the turning of the south.

In contrast, let's look at the 1976 election and the 1968 election.

Carter wins Presidency by winning south

Humphrey and Wallace take the south

Now, let's examine Reagan and beyond:

Reagan domination in 1980

Reagan annihilation in 1984

Bush castration in 1988

Clinton coup in 1992

Clinton re-election in 1996

W. in 2000

w. gets re-elected

Socialism arrives ;-)

Looking at all of these maps, a couple of things strike me. 1) How infuriated Americans were with Jimmy Carter in 1980 (the President most like Pres. Obama). He drove the southern vote to the Republican party, where it stayed until 2) Bill Clinton managed to capture it back somewhat in 1992 and for the most part in 1996, only to have a terrible sex scandal in his second term.

From 2000 forward, the south has been staunchly conservative.

Maybe after the double whammy of failed policy by Carter and failed person by Clinton, Southerners had just had enough.

That's exactly what happened. Civil Rights was pretty much the catalyst for the flipping of the southern states. Nixon's southern strategy 8 years later helped solidify it. Doesn't make the Democrats any better or the Republicans any worse of a party, its just what happened.

Wrong. Democrats have repeated that one so often it sounds right, but it's wrong.

The Civil Rights Act opened the door for George Wallace (a Democrat) to run on a third party ticket and take the south, but southerners in the 60s were sure not going to vote for a Republican. Not until they were presented with George McGovern as an alternative.

Check the timestamp brah, that prediction was made an hour before the caucus began. And every political pundit revises their predictions until the last minute because things change on a whim. Between now and Tuesday Newt Gingrich could skinny dip in the Hudson River, and Rick Perry could cure cancer. You just never know man.

So, you are now a self proclamed "political pundit?"

It's pretty clear that the democrats just ran a really crappy candidate that year

McGovern being a poor candidate had a lot to do with it.

There's also a really good book called Nixonland about how Nixon was able to use fear in politics (starting with civil rights) to help solidify Republicans winning in the south.

Carter wins Presidency by winning south

Yep. Both he and Clinton were seen as more conservative Democrats, and they were southern, so it definitely brought over a few southern states back to blue.

Humphrey and Wallace take the south

Right. The Civil Rights was the start. Proof positive in Wallace winning all of those southern states. The Democratic party always had its more liberal northeastern & west coast wing along with its more conservative wing. What helped start that split back all the way to 1948 with Strom Thurmond as the "Dixiecrat" nominee? Civil Rights.

Reagan domination in 1980

Reagan annihilation in 1984

Bush castration in 1988

Clinton coup in 1992

Clinton re-election in 1996

W. in 2000

w. gets re-elected

Socialism arrives ;-)

You don't need to remind me of how the elections went in the last 50 years, I'm very aware. It doesn't really prove your point. It was a slow process no doubt, but civil rights was the catalyst.

1) How infuriated Americans were with Jimmy Carter in 1980 (the President most like Pres. Obama).

Maybe in your head Americans are furious, but in reality his approval rating is sitting pretty high considering the economic circumstances we're in.

From 2000 forward, the south has been staunchly conservative.

The south has always been staunchly conservative, the difference being that the parties are pretty much reversed than what they were say....I dunno, pre civil-rights? Is that a good starting point for it?

Edited January 6, 2012 by Coffee and TV

Wrong. Democrats have repeated that one so often it sounds right, but it's wrong.

The Civil Rights Act opened the door for George Wallace (a Democrat) to run on a third party ticket and take the south, but southerners in the 60s were sure not going to vote for a Republican. Not until they were presented with George McGovern as an alternative.

Funny, because in 1964 that's exactly what they did.

So, you are now a self proclamed "political pundit?"

pun·dit

   [puhn-dit]

noun 1.a learned person, expert, or authority.

2.a person who makes comments or judgments, especially in an authoritative manner; critic or commentator.

http://dictionary.re...m/browse/pundit

I'd say the 2nd definition describes us both in this thread along. Pretty much everyone on this board is a football or basketball pundit as well.

pun·dit

   [puhn-dit]

noun 1.a learned person, expert, or authority.

2.a person who makes comments or judgments, especially in an authoritative manner; critic or commentator.

http://dictionary.re...m/browse/pundit

I'd say the 2nd definition describes us both in this thread along. Pretty much everyone on this board is a football or basketball pundit as well.

I think very few think of themselves as a "pundit" on this board.

I have little doubt you do.

Jimmy Carter was far far far far far far far far far from conservative. Now, from your own very liberal left view, I'm sure you see him that way. HISTORY does not.

Edited January 6, 2012 by UNT90

I think very few think of themselves as a "pundit" on this board.

I have little doubt you do.

You continually patronizing me doesn't help whatever points you're trying to make.

Jimmy Carter was far far far far far far far far far from conservative.

In 1976 he was seen as a pretty moderate Blue Dog Democrat. There was also little time since Nixon & Watergate (and Ford's pardon) and Carter was seen as very anti-Washington which helped him tremendously that year.

Me and Screaming Eagle aren't the same person...

You people all look the same...

You people all look the same...

You continually patronizing me doesn't help whatever points you're trying to make.

Ya, cause that's not patronizing....

Wikipedia? Seriously? You do know how Wiki works, right? Here I give you props about even knowing anything about SOPA and you come abck with more Comedy central. Just where do you get all your stuff?

Geeez--ok try this then... much better... same info.

Prior to 2000

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm

After 2000

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

Is the official US Treasury site good enough for you....??? Easier to read for you anyway.

Comment on this being inaccurate then. The truth just isn't what you WANT it to be.

The info is the same, stops at Sept 30... the end of fiscal years..not calender years as the other did...

Edited January 7, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

I am sure there is no copyright law broken by posting Government info.

US Treasury site:

more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.

Date ---------Dollar Amount

----------------------------------

09/30/2011 --not available--

09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75 ---end of last W. Bush budget

09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49

09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48

09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23

09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62

09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06 --end of last Clinton budget

09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86

09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43

09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32 --end of Clinton's first budget

09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38 --End Bush Sr. Budget

09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66

09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25

--------------------------------------------

I really want you who think 2001-2009 was a really conservative financial era read this. "Wake up and read"

This is the chart from the US Treasury site. [ non-political obviously ]

..

.

Edited January 7, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

Anyone remember 09/2011? Shouldn't there be a footnote during and the years after 09-30-01? I believe the cost of our military involvement in the Middle East had to increase our budget/spending. Or, was that totally a George Bush decision? No one else in Washington agreed on going to the Middle East?

The South didn't come close to going Republican until Reagan came along and the conservative wing of the democrat party was told they were not welcome in the party anymore.

The South absolutely did not go republican because of being driven away by LBJ.

Lyndon Johnson thought so and predicted it:

"We have just lost the South for a generation."

http://www.quotesby.net/Lyndon-Johnson

It is near bottom of page and can be found many other places as well.

____________

After that sort of wore off.. then the GOP started appealing to the Bible Belt on religious reasons... Huckabee, Santorum, Falwell, Pat Robertson (who ran), Backman, Palin, W.Bush, .. and dozens more..... including Perry now. Odd that it actually works somewhat... the GOP has many or more moral scandals than the Democrats.. Cain and Gingrich in this election alone.

Lyndon Johnson thought so and predicted it:

"We have just lost the South for a generation."

http://www.quotesby.net/Lyndon-Johnson

It is near bottom of page and can be found many other places as well.

____________

After that sort of wore off.. then the GOP started appealing to the Bible Belt on religious reasons... Huckabee, Santorum, Falwell, Pat Robertson (who ran), Backman, Palin, W.Bush, .. and dozens more..... including Perry now. Odd that it actually works somewhat... the GOP has many or more moral scandals than the Democrats.. Cain and Gingrich in this election alone.

So, if they lost the South for a generation, explain very liberal Jimmy Carter's success in the south a scant 8 years later.

It is propaganda spread by the democrat party that repulicans were against civil rights, so that is why the south went to republicans in 2000. Such sound logic that is. Even though it was a wing of their own party that was fighting HARD against civil rights, but never mind that. Look past it,. Never mind that Abraham Lincoln was a republican and fought democrats tooth and nail to get rid of slavery. Just look past it. Former Clansmen Robert Byrd in your party? Celebrate his "enlightenment" and pontificate on how couragous it is for him to change. But, lord forbid a republican smoked a joint in college or, more recently, even suggest that the black community should demand jobs over food stamps because that means he is a RACIST!!

This is how the propoganda machine works. You can see it in Coffee's posts on politics when he presents things that are completely opinion based as facts. I don't blame him, as that is the playbook he has been taught. Say something, repeat it often and loudly, and soon people will begin to believe you.

.

So, if they lost the South for a generation, explain very liberal Jimmy Carter's success in the south a scant 8 years later.

It is propaganda spread by the democrat party that repulicans were against civil rights, so that is why the south went to republicans in 2000. Such sound logic that is. Even though it was a wing of their own party that was fighting HARD against civil rights, but never mind that. Look past it,. Never mind that Abraham Lincoln was a republican and fought democrats tooth and nail to get rid of slavery. Just look past it. Former Clansmen Robert Byrd in your party? Celebrate his "enlightenment" and pontificate on how couragous it is for him to change. But, lord forbid a republican smoked a joint in college or, more recently, even suggest that the black community should demand jobs over food stamps because that means he is a RACIST!!

This is how the propoganda machine works. You can see it in Coffee's posts on politics when he presents things that are completely opinion based as facts. I don't blame him, as that is the playbook he has been taught. Say something, repeat it often and loudly, and soon people will begin to believe you.

.

Expanations (you asked):

I. Like I said... Carter fit the Christian right more than the Liberal title you try to nail on him.... Explain how he was Liberal other than just saying it...

II. Watergate: Remember when GOP Nixon [ "I am not a Crook" ] had to leave office.... a lot of people did not forgive Ford for pardoning him. Ford lost to Carter who then lasted one term. Also Carter was from the South, taught Sunday-School , was ex-military, and all of that that had some appeal also..

-----------

Abraham Lincoln...!!!! Good grief.... That was 150 years ago... most of our great-grand parents were not even alive yet........ Note-- the South succeeded from the Union prior to his inauguration and I would hardly say he fought tooth and nail to free the slaves... The Emancipation Proclamation took place in the third year of his Presidency... He did fight from the beginning to keep the union intact... Can we also bring up political scandals from that era also plus the terrible reconstruction the GOP did to the South and especially Texas...... You are using "sort of" dated issues. [ I had some Saxons in my family .... should I get upset how the Normans treated them after the Norman invasion in 1066. ]

..

.Byrd..?? I see you omitted Strom Thurman (GOP) who actually had a little known illigit. black daughter and fought "tooth and nail" against civil rights bills. We both know why he and some others switched to GOP after they passed.

..

Edited January 8, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

In mentioning Marco Rubio earlier.

Rubio in letter to Obama: You are turning America into a 'deadbeat nation'

In the letter obtained by HUMAN EVENTS, the Florida Senator said that President Obama’s upcoming request to increase the debt ceiling by a whopping $1.2 trillion will cause the nation’s public debt to surpass the $16 trillion mark.

“I will oppose your request to continue borrowing and spending recklessly.”

President Obama is expected to request the new borrowing power from Congress once the Senate and House return from their holiday recess.

Rick

Edited January 10, 2012 by FirefightnRick

Expanations (you asked):

I. Like I said... Carter fit the Christian right more than the Liberal title you try to nail on him.... Explain how he was Liberal other than just saying it...

II. Watergate: Remember when GOP Nixon [ "I am not a Crook" ] had to leave office.... a lot of people did not forgive Ford for pardoning him. Ford lost to Carter who then lasted one term. Also Carter was from the South, taught Sunday-School , was ex-military, and all of that that had some appeal also..

-----------

Abraham Lincoln...!!!! Good grief.... That was 150 years ago... most of our great-grand parents were not even alive yet........ Note-- the South succeeded from the Union prior to his inauguration and I would hardly say he fought tooth and nail to free the slaves... The Emancipation Proclamation took place in the third year of his Presidency... He did fight from the beginning to keep the union intact... Can we also bring up political scandals from that era also plus the terrible reconstruction the GOP did to the South and especially Texas...... You are using "sort of" dated issues. [ I had some Saxons in my family .... should I get upset how the Normans treated them after the Norman invasion in 1066. ]

..

.Byrd..?? I see you omitted Strom Thurman (GOP) who actually had a little known illigit. black daughter and fought "tooth and nail" against civil rights bills. We both know why he and some others switched to GOP after they passed.

..

Well, considering the argument was that Johnson's civil rights legislation led to the South turning republican (with the insinuation that Republicans are the party for bigots and the south is the home of bigots), let's look at Jimmy Carter's views on civil rights legislation: In 1973, established MLK day in Georgia, demanded that picture of MLK be hung in the Georgia State Capitol building. Not exactly far right stances against civil rights. My god, how did the south (you know, those stupid rednecks) ever vote him into office?

Carter wanted a national health care system and to drastically cut defense spending. If you want to call that middle of the road in 1976, you must be on a left lane only road.

People vote the economy. Period. If the economy is in the same shape a year from now, Pres. Obama will most likely not be President (would be a slam dunk if Romney weren't the current frontrunner).

Everything else, we will no, no, no, no, never, never, never, never agree upon.