Ted Cruz Compares Democrats to the Ku Klux Klan

[136or142]

I hate the GOP, but let's dispel with this fiction that Goldwater inspired racist Democrats to become Republicans. It's almost as bad as the myth that Northern Republicans wanted to abolish slavery because they were so magnanimous and righteous.

It was a complicated process in so far as most Republicans didn't want Goldwater to be their party's nominee and Goldwater didn't win on the issue, but for the Republican Party whose hyper partisan members like to lie that 'they are the true party of civil rights' nominating a person who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act to be their Presidential standard bearer in the 1964 election hardly bears that out.

Ronald Reagan was also for the 1964 Civil Rights Act before he was against it.

So, for those keeping score:
Republican Party Presidential nominees who opposed 1964 Civil Rights Act: 2
Democratic Party Presidential nominees who opposed 1964 Civil Rights Act: 0

[136or142]

I hate the GOP, but let's dispel with this fiction that Goldwater inspired racist Democrats to become Republicans. It's almost as bad as the myth that Northern Republicans wanted to abolish slavery because they were so magnanimous and righteous.

It was a complicated process in so far as most Republicans didn't want Goldwater to be their party's nominee and Goldwater didn't win on the issue, but for the Republican Party whose hyper partisan members like to lie that 'they are the true party of civil rights' nominating a person who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act to be their Presidential standard bearer in the 1964 election hardly bears that out.

Ronald Reagan was also for the 1964 Civil Rights Act before he was against it.

So, for those keeping score:
Republican Party Presidential nominees who opposed 1964 Civil Rights Act: 2
Democratic Party Presidential nominees who opposed 1964 Civil Rights Act: 0

If we extend it to pre-1965 legislation, I think the score gets a heck of a lot more even.  Eisenhower supported both civil rights bills that he signed, and while Stevenson might have been for such a bill (not sure what he promised on the campaign trail), he picked an open segregationist as his runningmate.  Before Truman's EO to desegregate the military, however (which was effectively really done by Eisenhower anyway), the Democrats had a LOT of ground to make up, so I champion them finally getting two points on the board.

The issue is whether the Democratic Party of today is comparable to the Ku Klux Klan.  When people have to go back 50+ years into the past to make a claim, it's usually because they have no recent/current history as evidence to back up their claims. 

I wonder if Ted Cruz believes that Greece and Rome are still empires.

For instance, I would agree that Republicans nominating Barry Goldwater is no evidence that the Republican Party of today is racist, but I used it because it's counter evidence of this lie from hyper partisan Republicans that their party is the 'true civil rights party' whereas the 'Democrat Party opposed the Civil Rights Act.'

[136or142]

I hate the GOP, but let's dispel with this fiction that Goldwater inspired racist Democrats to become Republicans. It's almost as bad as the myth that Northern Republicans wanted to abolish slavery because they were so magnanimous and righteous.

It was a complicated process in so far as most Republicans didn't want Goldwater to be their party's nominee and Goldwater didn't win on the issue, but for the Republican Party whose hyper partisan members like to lie that 'they are the true party of civil rights' nominating a person who voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act to be their Presidential standard bearer in the 1964 election hardly bears that out.

Ronald Reagan was also for the 1964 Civil Rights Act before he was against it.

So, for those keeping score:
Republican Party Presidential nominees who opposed 1964 Civil Rights Act: 2
Democratic Party Presidential nominees who opposed 1964 Civil Rights Act: 0

If we extend it to pre-1965 legislation, I think the score gets a heck of a lot more even.  Eisenhower supported both civil rights bills that he signed, and while Stevenson might have been for such a bill (not sure what he promised on the campaign trail), he picked an open segregationist as his runningmate.  Before Truman's EO to desegregate the military, however (which was effectively really done by Eisenhower anyway), the Democrats had a LOT of ground to make up, so I champion them finally getting two points on the board.

The issue is whether the Democratic Party of today is comparable to the Ku Klux Klan.  When people have to go back 60+ years into the past to make a claim, it's usually because they have no recent history as evidence to back up their claims.

I wonder if Ted Cruz believes that Greece and Rome are still empires.

I'm not denying Cruz's comments were stupid, but you were the one who brought up the 1960s, so I responded to that era.

It was Ted Cruz who brought up ancient history, not me.

[136or142]

This is something a lot of anti trump people have basically been saying. Cruz claiming the dems are currently affiliated with the kkk is just as absurd and unfair as the dems saying Trump is a nazi Hitler fascist. Its very easy to lampoon bad policies without stupid name calling.

what is remotely inaccurate about calling Trump a Fascist other than his government take over hasn't totally succeeded yet.

The OP wrote it would be like comparing Trump to a "nazi Hitler Fascist."  I don't know if Mr. Reactionary meant that he didn't like the comparison of Trump to Hitler, which I agree is over the top, but agreed, at least as a possibility, that there is a lot of similarity between Trump and Mussolini, or that the OP didn't think in any way that Trump was a Fascist.

I agree with the idea that Trump has a lot in common with Mussolini, but, as deranged as Trump is, I don't think he wants to commit genocide.