Why did Little River County, AR swung so hard to the Republicans in 2008?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%

WV wasnt a state in 1860

I separated the vote totals by 1868 state borders based on County data compiled by various sources to create this ranking.

Wow so WV swung massively then from 1860-1864 cause Lincoln won 68% of the vote there in 1864

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%

WV wasnt a state in 1860

I separated the vote totals by 1868 state borders based on County data compiled by various sources to create this ranking.

Wow so WV swung massively then from 1860-1864 cause Lincoln won 68% of the vote there in 1864

Its very interesting that if 1 was to take the stance that Electors from states that seceded cannot be validly cast but that they still count towards the number of Electoral Votes a candidate needs to win the election (which is probably the most constitutionally sound standpoint), then a small shift of 3375 votes in New York and 10038 votes in Pennsylvania from Lincoln to McClellan in 1864 would have sent the 1864 Election to Congress, which probably also would have deadlocked in both chambers (as constitutionally, seceded state delegations probably would have likewise counted towards the denominator but not eligible to count in any numerator). We may have came only 13413 votes in 2 states away from a complete lack of leadership constitutional crisis in the 1864 Election right in the middle of the secession constitutional crisis at the same time. There were 314 Electoral votes total that Election, but only 234 of them could have been legally counted for any candidate.

Maybe West Virginia residents were concerned that if such was to happen, then the Confederacy would be able to take the state back in the crisis of a void in legal leadership, and put them back into a reunified state of Virginia.

[R.P. McM]

Considering you just got moderated for using that word don't you think you better stop using it?


Also, I am not responsible for what NC Did in the 1980's and 1990's, because
1. I was born in 1991 in Pennsylvania
2. Didn't set foot in NC until 2002 at age eleven, and I didn't exactly have a choice in the move
3. Wasn't registered to vote until 2010

I think you're missing the point — the state of NC is responsible. For electing Confederates, segregationists, and empowering a political party to, in the words of the 4th Circuit, enact voter suppression measures designed to "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision." That was three years ago! Same old BS. So yeah, when I suggest that maybe the electorate of NC isn't yet morally or intellectually equipped to participate in our national debate — and certainly wasn't from 1850 to 1950 — I genuinely mean it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Considering you just got moderated for using that word don't you think you better stop using it?


Also, I am not responsible for what NC Did in the 1980's and 1990's, because
1. I was born in 1991 in Pennsylvania
2. Didn't set foot in NC until 2002 at age eleven, and I didn't exactly have a choice in the move
3. Wasn't registered to vote until 2010

I think you're missing the point — the state of NC is responsible. For electing Confederates, segregationists, and empowering a political party to, in the words of the 4th Circuit, enact voter suppression measures designed to "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision." That was two years ago! Same old BS. So yeah, when I suggest that maybe the electorate of NC isn't yet morally or intellectually equipped to participate in our national debate — and certainly wasn't from 1850 to 1950 — I genuinely mean it.

If I could afford to move back North, I would, I don't appreciate you treating me like crap just because I am not rich.

[R.P. McM]

^ Kind of ironic coming from me, but this isn’t worth arguing with him.  You have provided this forum so much more knowledge, fresh perspective and much needed correction on more occasions than we can count.  This angry boi won’t be the last teenager who joins this forum to scream at us all how he knows everything and is entitled to frankly disgusting views because of it.

Tom, to be quite frank, you're the sort of person who, in times of great moral crisis, maintains his neutrality. You love to whine when I viciously attack Confederates and Segregationists and Nazis and Nazi-praising Republican presidents, never once seriously addressing their staggering moral culpability. Did people who started a war to preserve the barbaric institution of slavery, killing hundreds of thousands of Americans in the process, deserve some rather harsh treatment? Absolutely. They were monsters, pure and simple. But you're the sort of go-along-to-get-along type that betrayed AA's in the South during Reconstruction, or excused the conservative German establishment for elevating Adolph Hitler. To you, morality is more a function of popular opinion, and people who raise hell when abominable acts are being committed are hysterical or unhinged. You're perfectly emblematic of today's Republican Party, so pat yourself on the back.

You haven't once read what I have said in this thread, so one can hardly be surprised that he doesn't find your righteous outrage sincere when you spent a week trying to pin the confederacy on one of the most anti-confederate Republicans on this forum, its even in my name username.

You were the last person I would want by my side in crisis because you let your passion get ahead of the facts.

You see a blue NC avatar and think you know everything about that person. Then you don't listen to a damn thing thing they say and just keep swinging at him and others and even going so far as to violate the Terms of Service in the process with personal attacks more befitting the type you are criticizing.

No, see, the difference is, I think the election of an openly racist rapist in the 21st century is a crisis. But you folks are fine with it. Tom spends ALL of his time grousing at folks like me, who are appalled at the actions of the political party he aligns with. An American president praising Nazis?! You've got to be f**king kidding me. But again, you guys never attack the individuals who put you in the position to answer for this BS, just the folks who aren't willing to hide their righteous disgust and indignation.

I should add, as an addendum, that one of the reasons I go so hard at Southerners, evangelicals, and other racially retrograde whites is that I myself am Caucasian. So it deeply embarrasses me to see white people behaving in such a disgraceful manner. The possibility of being associated with them sickens me, frankly. I work with a bunch of immigrants and non-whites, and I literally have to explain to them that I'm not one of those white people. Which is depressing and demeaning. You and Tom should try applying the same logic to the Trump Party.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

^ Kind of ironic coming from me, but this isn’t worth arguing with him.  You have provided this forum so much more knowledge, fresh perspective and much needed correction on more occasions than we can count.  This angry boi won’t be the last teenager who joins this forum to scream at us all how he knows everything and is entitled to frankly disgusting views because of it.

Tom, to be quite frank, you're the sort of person who, in times of great moral crisis, maintains his neutrality. You love to whine when I viciously attack Confederates and Segregationists and Nazis and Nazi-praising Republican presidents, never once seriously addressing their staggering moral culpability. Did people who started a war to preserve the barbaric institution of slavery, killing hundreds of thousands of Americans in the process, deserve some rather harsh treatment? Absolutely. They were monsters, pure and simple. But you're the sort of go-along-to-get-along type that betrayed AA's in the South during Reconstruction, or excused the conservative German establishment for elevating Adolph Hitler. To you, morality is more a function of popular opinion, and people who raise hell when abominable acts are being committed are hysterical or unhinged. You're perfectly emblematic of today's Republican Party, so pat yourself on the back.

You haven't once read what I have said in this thread, so one can hardly be surprised that he doesn't find your righteous outrage sincere when you spent a week trying to pin the confederacy on one of the most anti-confederate Republicans on this forum, its even in my name username.

You were the last person I would want by my side in crisis because you let your passion get ahead of the facts.

You see a blue NC avatar and think you know everything about that person. Then you don't listen to a damn thing thing they say and just keep swinging at him and others and even going so far as to violate the Terms of Service in the process with personal attacks more befitting the type you are criticizing.

No, see, the difference is, I think the election of an openly racist rapist in the 21st century is a crisis. But you folks are fine with it. Tom spends ALL of his time whining at folks like me, who are appalled at the actions of the political party he aligns with. An American president praising Nazis?! You've got to be effing kidding me. But again, you folks never attack the individuals who put you in the position to answer for this BS, just the folks who aren't willing to hide their righteous disgust and indignation.

I never attacked you, you attacked me for correcting historical inaccuracies, which I do frequently on the Trends, history and other boards.

[R.P. McM]

Considering you just got moderated for using that word don't you think you better stop using it?


Also, I am not responsible for what NC Did in the 1980's and 1990's, because
1. I was born in 1991 in Pennsylvania
2. Didn't set foot in NC until 2002 at age eleven, and I didn't exactly have a choice in the move
3. Wasn't registered to vote until 2010

I think you're missing the point — the state of NC is responsible. For electing Confederates, segregationists, and empowering a political party to, in the words of the 4th Circuit, enact voter suppression measures designed to "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision." That was two years ago! Same old BS. So yeah, when I suggest that maybe the electorate of NC isn't yet morally or intellectually equipped to participate in our national debate — and certainly wasn't from 1850 to 1950 — I genuinely mean it.

If I could afford to move back North, I would, I don't appreciate you treating me like crap just because I am not rich.

I'm not wealthy either, and I do genuinely appreciate your contributions to this forum. But you have to understand, when the de facto leader of your political party does and says appalling things, you can't expect the rest of us to remain silent. Nor can you expect the rest of us to make exceptions for the ~10% of Republicans that oppose Trump. We're going to attack, and that attack is perfectly justified. In fact, had the Democratic Party elected such an odious creature, I would fully expect Republicans to do likewise. And I'd probably switch my party registration in the process.

[R.P. McM]

^ Kind of ironic coming from me, but this isn’t worth arguing with him.  You have provided this forum so much more knowledge, fresh perspective and much needed correction on more occasions than we can count.  This angry boi won’t be the last teenager who joins this forum to scream at us all how he knows everything and is entitled to frankly disgusting views because of it.

Tom, to be quite frank, you're the sort of person who, in times of great moral crisis, maintains his neutrality. You love to whine when I viciously attack Confederates and Segregationists and Nazis and Nazi-praising Republican presidents, never once seriously addressing their staggering moral culpability. Did people who started a war to preserve the barbaric institution of slavery, killing hundreds of thousands of Americans in the process, deserve some rather harsh treatment? Absolutely. They were monsters, pure and simple. But you're the sort of go-along-to-get-along type that betrayed AA's in the South during Reconstruction, or excused the conservative German establishment for elevating Adolph Hitler. To you, morality is more a function of popular opinion, and people who raise hell when abominable acts are being committed are hysterical or unhinged. You're perfectly emblematic of today's Republican Party, so pat yourself on the back.

You haven't once read what I have said in this thread, so one can hardly be surprised that he doesn't find your righteous outrage sincere when you spent a week trying to pin the confederacy on one of the most anti-confederate Republicans on this forum, its even in my name username.

You were the last person I would want by my side in crisis because you let your passion get ahead of the facts.

You see a blue NC avatar and think you know everything about that person. Then you don't listen to a damn thing thing they say and just keep swinging at him and others and even going so far as to violate the Terms of Service in the process with personal attacks more befitting the type you are criticizing.

No, see, the difference is, I think the election of an openly racist rapist in the 21st century is a crisis. But you folks are fine with it. Tom spends ALL of his time whining at folks like me, who are appalled at the actions of the political party he aligns with. An American president praising Nazis?! You've got to be effing kidding me. But again, you folks never attack the individuals who put you in the position to answer for this BS, just the folks who aren't willing to hide their righteous disgust and indignation.

I never attacked you, you attacked me for correcting historical inaccuracies, which I do frequently on the Trends, history and other boards.

Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I don't think anything I said was historically inaccurate, and I view your efforts as an attempt to minimize the differences between the North and South on the question of slavery, an issue which ultimately led to the bloodiest conflict in American history. The idea that Lincoln was a moderate or unifying figure is a Spielbergian fiction — never before or since has the outcome of a presidential election precipitated a civil war. Lincoln may have been moderate relative to other Northern abolitionists, but that's like saying Kamala Harris is a centrist relative to Bernie Sanders. Great: half the country still hates her. But unlike Lincoln, not intensely enough to start a war over.

[DINGO Joe]

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%

WV wasnt a state in 1860

I separated the vote totals by 1868 state borders based on County data compiled by various sources to create this ranking.

Wow so WV swung massively then from 1860-1864 cause Lincoln won 68% of the vote there in 1864

Kind of hard to explain how voting was done back in that time, but outside of the Northern Panhandle, it would have been virtually impossible to obtain a ballot to vote for Lincoln in 1860 even if you wanted to.  Of course, in 1864 if you were a Confederate in WV, you'd have a hard time voting at all.

[darklordoftech]

If you’re looking for racist counties, I would look for Gore-Kerry-McCain-Romney-Hillary counties.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

If you’re looking for racist counties, I would look for Gore-Kerry-McCain-Romney-Hillary counties.

0 exist, but some locations like that do.

North Reading, Walpole, Wilmington Townships in Massachusetts for example.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%

WV wasnt a state in 1860

I separated the vote totals by 1868 state borders based on County data compiled by various sources to create this ranking.

Wow so WV swung massively then from 1860-1864 cause Lincoln won 68% of the vote there in 1864

Kind of hard to explain how voting was done back in that time, but outside of the Northern Panhandle, it would have been virtually impossible to obtain a ballot to vote for Lincoln in 1860 even if you wanted to.  Of course, in 1864 if you were a Confederate in WV, you'd have a hard time voting at all.

It must also be remembered the effect of the Bell candidacy on the border states. A lot of areas that were later vote Republican post war had Bell doing rather well in them, South Central KY comes to mind and if the map is any indicator there is a large cluster of Bell Counties in what would become West Virginia.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%

WV wasnt a state in 1860

I separated the vote totals by 1868 state borders based on County data compiled by various sources to create this ranking.

Wow so WV swung massively then from 1860-1864 cause Lincoln won 68% of the vote there in 1864

Kind of hard to explain how voting was done back in that time, but outside of the Northern Panhandle, it would have been virtually impossible to obtain a ballot to vote for Lincoln in 1860 even if you wanted to.  Of course, in 1864 if you were a Confederate in WV, you'd have a hard time voting at all.

It must also be remembered the effect of the Bell candidacy on the border states. A lot of areas that were later vote Republican post war had Bell doing rather well in them, South Central KY comes to mind and if the map is any indicator there is a large cluster of Bell Counties in what would become West Virginia.

Bell actually lost what would become West Virginia to Breckenridge. He won the state in 1860 from the areas that would remain Virginia.

[redeagleofficial]

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.

And who they are, are yellow dogs finally waking up to the democratic party being too socially liberal for their interests. Race was not in these peoples heads at the voting booth.

This is delusional. John Kerry was more socially liberal than Obama and he did pretty well with yellow dogs. keep in mind he was also painted as a "Massachusetts liberal", a "coastal elitist" and so on. as I said before, there are very few logical explanations for why so many voters would switch from Kerry to McCain other than racism.

McCain was more experienced in a time of crisis/they thought Obama was too uninterventionist, there are many reasons.

[R.P. McM]

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.

And who they are, are yellow dogs finally waking up to the democratic party being too socially liberal for their interests. Race was not in these peoples heads at the voting booth.

This is delusional. John Kerry was more socially liberal than Obama and he did pretty well with yellow dogs. keep in mind he was also painted as a "Massachusetts liberal", a "coastal elitist" and so on. as I said before, there are very few logical explanations for why so many voters would switch from Kerry to McCain other than racism.

McCain was more experienced in a time of crisis/they thought Obama was too uninterventionist, there are many reasons.

But Trump was the least-experienced presidential candidate in American history, and he campaigned as an anti-interventionist. Southern whites supported him overwhelmingly. So ... yeah, we all get it. Some of you folks are in deep denial. Or, more likely, racists yourselves. Notice that no Republicans are ever willing to identity as racist, but a whole sh!+load of them say and do racist things all the time. I'm sorry, but the jig is up, the mask has fallen. Lying isn't going to save you at this point.

[RINO Tom]

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.

And who they are, are yellow dogs finally waking up to the democratic party being too socially liberal for their interests. Race was not in these peoples heads at the voting booth.

This is delusional. John Kerry was more socially liberal than Obama and he did pretty well with yellow dogs. keep in mind he was also painted as a "Massachusetts liberal", a "coastal elitist" and so on. as I said before, there are very few logical explanations for why so many voters would switch from Kerry to McCain other than racism.

McCain was more experienced in a time of crisis/they thought Obama was too uninterventionist, there are many reasons.

But Trump was the least experienced presidential candidate in American history, and he campaigned as an anti-interventionist. Southern whites supported him overwhelmingly. So ... yeah, we all get it. Some of you folks are in deep denial. Or, more likely, racists yourselves. Notice that no Republicans are ever willing to identity as racist, but a whole sh!+load of them say and do racist things all the time. I'm sorry, but the jig is up, the mask has fallen. Lying isn't going to save you at this point.

There are plenty of racist elements in the GOP, there have been since the 1850s.  Simply I dentifying with one of TWO parties doesn’t, however, make you guilty by association ... never has, never will, at least not for grounded people.

[R.P. McM]

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.

And who they are, are yellow dogs finally waking up to the democratic party being too socially liberal for their interests. Race was not in these peoples heads at the voting booth.

This is delusional. John Kerry was more socially liberal than Obama and he did pretty well with yellow dogs. keep in mind he was also painted as a "Massachusetts liberal", a "coastal elitist" and so on. as I said before, there are very few logical explanations for why so many voters would switch from Kerry to McCain other than racism.

McCain was more experienced in a time of crisis/they thought Obama was too uninterventionist, there are many reasons.

But Trump was the least experienced presidential candidate in American history, and he campaigned as an anti-interventionist. Southern whites supported him overwhelmingly. So ... yeah, we all get it. Some of you folks are in deep denial. Or, more likely, racists yourselves. Notice that no Republicans are ever willing to identity as racist, but a whole sh!+load of them say and do racist things all the time. I'm sorry, but the jig is up, the mask has fallen. Lying isn't going to save you at this point.

There are plenty of racist elements in the GOP, there have been since the 1850s.  Simply I dentifying with one of TWO parties doesn’t, however, make you guilty by association ... never has, never will, at least not for grounded people.

Absurd. Of course identifying with the Dixiecrats or the secessionist Democrats of the 1860's made you a racist! Hahahaha! You know the NSDAP was a popular political party, right? Were its adherents anti-Semites for supporting Hitler? (Maybe they were attracted to his trade policy ...) Or does this ludicrous axiom only apply to American political parties in the early-21st century?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Ranking of Lincolns 1860 Performance in the border states:

1. NJ 48.13%
2. DE 23.72%
3. MO 10.28%
4. WV 03.63%
5. MD 02.48%
6. KY 00.93%
^. VA 00.08%

WV wasnt a state in 1860

I separated the vote totals by 1868 state borders based on County data compiled by various sources to create this ranking.

Wow so WV swung massively then from 1860-1864 cause Lincoln won 68% of the vote there in 1864

Kind of hard to explain how voting was done back in that time, but outside of the Northern Panhandle, it would have been virtually impossible to obtain a ballot to vote for Lincoln in 1860 even if you wanted to.  Of course, in 1864 if you were a Confederate in WV, you'd have a hard time voting at all.

It must also be remembered the effect of the Bell candidacy on the border states. A lot of areas that were later vote Republican post war had Bell doing rather well in them, South Central KY comes to mind and if the map is any indicator there is a large cluster of Bell Counties in what would become West Virginia.

Bell actually lost what would become West Virginia to Breckenridge. He won the state in 1860 from the areas that would remain Virginia.

The point wasn't that Bell would have won it, but explaining why Lincoln was so low in the area. The few voters that he would have got went to Bell. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.

And who they are, are yellow dogs finally waking up to the democratic party being too socially liberal for their interests. Race was not in these peoples heads at the voting booth.

This is delusional. John Kerry was more socially liberal than Obama and he did pretty well with yellow dogs. keep in mind he was also painted as a "Massachusetts liberal", a "coastal elitist" and so on. as I said before, there are very few logical explanations for why so many voters would switch from Kerry to McCain other than racism.

McCain was more experienced in a time of crisis/they thought Obama was too uninterventionist, there are many reasons.

But Trump was the least experienced presidential candidate in American history, and he campaigned as an anti-interventionist. Southern whites supported him overwhelmingly. So ... yeah, we all get it. Some of you folks are in deep denial. Or, more likely, racists yourselves. Notice that no Republicans are ever willing to identity as racist, but a whole sh!+load of them say and do racist things all the time. I'm sorry, but the jig is up, the mask has fallen. Lying isn't going to save you at this point.

There are plenty of racist elements in the GOP, there have been since the 1850s.  Simply I dentifying with one of TWO parties doesn’t, however, make you guilty by association ... never has, never will, at least not for grounded people.

Absurd. Of course identifying with the Dixiecrats or the secessionist Democrats of the 1860's made you a racist! Hahahaha! You know the NSDAP was a popular political party, right? Were its adherents anti-Semites for supporting Hitler? (Maybe they were attracted to his trade policy ...) Or does this ludicrous axiom only apply to American political parties in the early-21st century?

So anybody identifying with any party prior to the current day is a racist.

[darklordoftech]

Bell actually lost what would become West Virginia to Breckenridge.

Likely because of voter suppression.

[Idaho Conservative]

Something like 1/4 of Hillary voters went McCain.  This is Arkansas....

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Barack Hussein Obama made them economically anxious.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

Sure dude, I'm sure they swung Republican by 30% in 2008 of all years because they agreed with the Republican Party's economic agenda

[Sumner 1868]

Why is this thread still going?

[Grassroots]

LMAO @ Red Avs saying racism. Do you people ever get tired of bringing race into everything?

Sure dude, I'm sure they swung Republican by 30% in 2008 of all years because they agreed with the Republican Party's economic agenda

That's a very possible reason.