Did Nixon ruin the Republican Party?
I originally wrote this post back in early December relating to Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and it's implications towards the future including the immigration debate, and I still think it stands as one of the best posts I've ever written.
Short version, Nixon's "Southern Strategy," embracing the bigotry of the South bought significant political gains for a generation of Republicans by shifting their base away from the shrinking populations of the Northeast down to the growing populations of the bible belt. The longterm flaw in this strategy is that it added a constituency of the "nativist," read racist, as a necessary part of maintaining the Republican majority guaranteeing them a place at the table.
Although this "Southern Strategy" gave the Republicans a generation of political dominance rooted in the south, with shifting demographics and modernizing attitudes towards race, they now find themselves shackled to this racist constituency as a necessary part of their political coalition. The Republicans now need the racists to maintain their majority.
With the fault lines of the Republicans around the immigration debate currently revealing themselves, I thought it might be a good time to relink to this post.
Short version, Nixon's "Southern Strategy," embracing the bigotry of the South bought significant political gains for a generation of Republicans by shifting their base away from the shrinking populations of the Northeast down to the growing populations of the bible belt. The longterm flaw in this strategy is that it added a constituency of the "nativist," read racist, as a necessary part of maintaining the Republican majority guaranteeing them a place at the table.
Although this "Southern Strategy" gave the Republicans a generation of political dominance rooted in the south, with shifting demographics and modernizing attitudes towards race, they now find themselves shackled to this racist constituency as a necessary part of their political coalition. The Republicans now need the racists to maintain their majority.
With the fault lines of the Republicans around the immigration debate currently revealing themselves, I thought it might be a good time to relink to this post.
posted by mikevotes at
7:37 AM
3 Comments:
They're frantically denying that right now, to the point of issuing a revised civil rights calendar. Here's an
interesting post about that.
Still, if I were racist, I wouldn't have to think hard about which party I liked.
By
NYC Educator, at 11:49 AM
I think it's also interesting to note that Kevin Phillips, one of the key architects of the "southern strategy" is now completely repudiating it in his new book.
As I posted on my blog the other day, I really think that playing the race card with immigration legislation is a winner for Dems. The majority of Americans don't really want to stop the illegals. And any legislation will have the effect of turning the Hispanic vote away from the GOP, a group in which they have made inroads. Witness what happened in California when Pete Wilson tried the same strategy.
I hope Sensenbrenner is able to pass his bill through the House and into the Senate and then to Bush's desk.
That would be very interesting to watch.
By
Greyhair, at 1:06 PM
Yeah, I'm curious how the immigration politics will play out because they're not trying it in selective states like they did with gay marriage. They're nationalizing the issue.
The point about Kevin Phillips is interesting. Pat Buchannon, another in the formation of the Southern Strategy has also disclaimed it.
And there's no questions that the racists, if they vote, vote Republican.
But the thing is, the openly racist make up a relatively small number, it's the closet racists and those that carry bias but don't recognize it as racism that make up the significant part of the voting block.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 2:08 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home