Alternative 1968 Senatorial Election, Arkansas

[TDAS04]

Rockefeller.

[Mr. Smith]

Fulbright.

[Intell]

Fulbright.

[TDAS04]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

[America Needs R'hllor]

Rockfeller, of course. Not only was he a great politician, but also, you know, not a segregationist.

[Intell]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

[Sumner 1868]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

Rockefeller supported bombing and gassing non-white people in Vietnam. But I guess only First World Lives Matter apparently.

[Intell]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

Fulbright was far better on nearly every single issue and by that time most legislative victories for civil rights had already been won.

[😥]

Winthrop Rockefeller

[America Needs R'hllor]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

I do notice that blanket opposition to racism seems to be something only the "establishment" wings of the parties, as well as moderate independents, are consistent about. The far right and far left don't care about it as long as the politician is "a true conservative\pro life" (for the far right) or an "economic populist " for the far left. Interesting.

[Intell]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

I do notice that blanket opposition to racism seems to be something only the "establishment" wings of the parties, as well as moderate independents, are consistent about. The far right and far left don't care about it as long as the politician is "a true conservative\pro life" (for the far right) or an "economic populist " for the far left. Interesting.

I'm sure I'm an outlier, and even though Fulbright is the better candidate, I might still at the end of the day vote Rockefeller.

I have a blanket opposition to racism not only against African Americans but also people in Vietnam being bombed, to illegal wars overseas to right-wing neo-liberal economic policies. If I voted in accordance to strict morals, I would never vote for a Democratic candidate for president since 1992 bar 2008.

For me, support for civil rights when legislative victories for civil rights had already taken place is one important issue our of many other important  issues.

[MAINEiac4434]

Fulbright is among the least worst segregationists, but #winwithwinthrop

[OSR stands with Israel]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

Rockefeller supported bombing and gassing non-white people in Vietnam. But I guess only First World Lives Matter apparently.

Rockefeller's support for the Vietnam War didnt have anything to do with racism

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

Rockefeller supported bombing and gassing non-white people in Vietnam. But I guess only First World Lives Matter apparently.

Rockefeller's support for the Vietnam War didnt have anything to do with racism

Does it really matter?

[Sumner 1868]

Aren’t you a person of color, Intell?

Yes.

Then why would you support a segregationist

I do notice that blanket opposition to racism seems to be something only the "establishment" wings of the parties, as well as moderate independents, are consistent about. The far right and far left don't care about it as long as the politician is "a true conservative\pro life" (for the far right) or an "economic populist " for the far left. Interesting.

That really explains why Bill Clinton executed black men for photo ops, and why Michael Bloomberg "stop-and-frisked" like there was no tomorrow, and why our Re$i$tance martyr made racist comments about blacks and groups of immigrants in her now widely read emails.

For whatever it's worth Fulbright actually won the black vote in the actual 1968 race.