How did Ike do among Southern Blacks in 1956?

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

I think he did well considering Macon county Alabama and Charles City Virginia went for him.

[Adam Griffin]

I think he did well considering Macon county Alabama and Charles City Virginia went for him.

You can register for Atlas After Dark and see more detailed discussion on this: https://atlasafterdark.freeforums.net/thread/7246/macon-alabama

Warning: the forum is even more left-wing than this one, so if you post...just keep that in mind.

[RINO Tom]

I do recall seeing one time that Southern Blacks remained more Republican for longer than Northern Blacks (who, as a group, did not support any GOP Presidential nominee after Hoover in 1932).  While this makes sense given Democratic dominance in the region being directly associated with the power structure that kept them disenfranchised, it's interesting to note that by the EARLY 1960s, Black activists in the South VERY clearly saw the Democratic Party as a better vehicle for their interests.  After eight years of an ostensibly "pro-civil rights" Eisenhower Administration, this is interesting regardless of your political biases.  (I'm not saying it's without explanation, just that it's pretty interesting.)

EDIT: When you consider that Eisenhower got around 40% of the Black vote nationwide and that Northern urban areas were likely seeing Stevenson absolutely clean up with Black voters, it might actually be likely that Eisenhower won Southern Blacks.

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

I do recall seeing one time that Southern Blacks remained more Republican for longer than Northern Blacks (who, as a group, did not support any GOP Presidential nominee after Hoover in 1932).  While this makes sense given Democratic dominance in the region being directly associated with the power structure that kept them disenfranchised, it's interesting to note that by the EARLY 1960s, Black activists in the South VERY clearly saw the Democratic Party as a better vehicle for their interests.  After eight years of an ostensibly "pro-civil rights" Eisenhower Administration, this is interesting regardless of your political biases.  (I'm not saying it's without explanation, just that it's pretty interesting.)

EDIT: When you consider that Eisenhower got around 40% of the Black vote nationwide and that Northern urban areas were likely seeing Stevenson absolutely clean up with Black voters, it might actually be likely that Eisenhower won Southern Blacks.

I think it's pretty clear that southern blacks already had the democrats as their default position by the 1950s. I remember reading a google book where Ike only got about 20% of southern blacks (the few that could vote), in 1952, and that he got a huge surge in support among them in 1956 due to the Brown decision.

[Corbyn is (no longer) the leader of the Labour Party]

I do recall seeing one time that Southern Blacks remained more Republican for longer than Northern Blacks (who, as a group, did not support any GOP Presidential nominee after Hoover in 1932).  While this makes sense given Democratic dominance in the region being directly associated with the power structure that kept them disenfranchised, it's interesting to note that by the EARLY 1960s, Black activists in the South VERY clearly saw the Democratic Party as a better vehicle for their interests.  After eight years of an ostensibly "pro-civil rights" Eisenhower Administration, this is interesting regardless of your political biases.  (I'm not saying it's without explanation, just that it's pretty interesting.)

EDIT: When you consider that Eisenhower got around 40% of the Black vote nationwide and that Northern urban areas were likely seeing Stevenson absolutely clean up with Black voters, it might actually be likely that Eisenhower won Southern Blacks.

Why is that though? Given the pro segregation Democrats running the South at the time, why wouuld they vote for those same dems?

[ChrisMcDanielWasRobbed]

I do recall seeing one time that Southern Blacks remained more Republican for longer than Northern Blacks (who, as a group, did not support any GOP Presidential nominee after Hoover in 1932).  While this makes sense given Democratic dominance in the region being directly associated with the power structure that kept them disenfranchised, it's interesting to note that by the EARLY 1960s, Black activists in the South VERY clearly saw the Democratic Party as a better vehicle for their interests.  After eight years of an ostensibly "pro-civil rights" Eisenhower Administration, this is interesting regardless of your political biases.  (I'm not saying it's without explanation, just that it's pretty interesting.)

EDIT: When you consider that Eisenhower got around 40% of the Black vote nationwide and that Northern urban areas were likely seeing Stevenson absolutely clean up with Black voters, it might actually be likely that Eisenhower won Southern Blacks.

Why is that though? Given the pro segregation Democrats running the South at the time, why wouuld they vote for those same dems?

Yeah this is a bit strange. Especially since Macon still went for the dem slate in Alabama despite 6 of the electors being unpledged segregationists.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Another interesting thing is that despite his not-so-great record on Civil Rights, FDR was extremely popular in the Black Community, getting 75% of those who could vote in 1936 (the Black vote had previously been mostly Republican, though not to the extent that it's Democratic today). What explains that?

[Calthrina950]

Another interesting thing is that despite his not-so-great record on Civil Rights, FDR was extremely popular in the Black Community, getting 75% of those who could vote in 1936 (the Black vote had previously been mostly Republican, though not to the extent that it's Democratic today). What explains that?

The New Deal was the decisive factor in breaking the allegiance of black voters towards the Republican Party. Although blacks did not receive equal access to, or were universally benefited by, the New Deal programs, they nevertheless felt that those programs provided them more attention then they had been given under Republican Administrations in preceding decades. Moreover, First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt was very well known for her relationships with leaders of the black community at the time (i.e. Mary McLeod Bethune), and she pressured her husband to be more responsive to black issues, such as with anti-lynching legislation. Black voters certainly appreciated her efforts.

[RINO Tom]

^ Reading through statements made by Black leaders throughout the mid-Twentieth Century, it becomes apparent that they saw their political options more or less like this:

A) Ancestral party that talks politely about race issues and doesn’t have a large segregationist wing ... but that also promotes economic policies that benefit mostly upper-middle class Whites

or

B) Historically antagonistic party that has an influential segregationist wing that it clearly caters to quite often ... but that also promotes economic policies that benefit poorer voters, now including many Black Americans

They started to think that Option B was better for the Black community, and I can’t blame them.  I’d argue the Black community’s targeted and strategic preference for national Democrats caused the shift in attitudes on civil rights for both parties, rather than any inherent shift in the parties’ rhetoric causing a huge change in Black voting habits.  In other words, the fact that Black voters largely abandoned the GOP in favor of the New Deal very clearly influenced how Republicans chose to view civil rights in general.

[Intell]

Black voters stated breaking away from the democrats as early as 1912 for Wilson, now Wilson would alienate them from the democrats for a decade or two but the ground was laid earlier

[The Mikado]

I’d argue the Black community’s targeted and strategic preference for national Democrats caused the shift in attitudes on civil rights for both parties, rather than any inherent shift in the parties’ rhetoric causing a huge change in Black voting habits.  In other words, the fact that Black voters largely abandoned the GOP in favor of the New Deal very clearly influenced how Republicans chose to view civil rights in general.

I 100% agree that causation gets reversed here a lot and your interpretation is closer to right. Northern black voters moving towards the Democrats in the 1930s and 1940s made Northern Democrats dependent on them and concerned about their votes, and Northern black voters flirting with returning to the GOP in the 1950s made Northern Democrats really, really intent on trying to hold onto them by strengthening their commitments to civil rights. The fear that the black voters that helped make Democrats competitive in NY and PA and IL and MI might start going back to the GOP really put the fear of God in Northern Dems on Civil Rights.

[Sol]

A lot of good comments upthread, so I wanted to come at this from a different perspective--how many Black people were able to vote in the South in 1956? Obviously most were disenfranchised, but taking a look at where some were able to vote is worthwhile.

For example, the Democratic machine in Memphis had a deep base in the Black community, whom they frequently paid poll taxes for. That alone might be a big chunk of the Black Southern vote in 1956.

[Don Vito Corleone]

Apologies for the bump, but I was just discussing this topic a few days ago so I actually have the number on hand.

https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1295&=&context=student_scholarship&=&sei

This paper talks about how Eisenhower overperformed among Black Voters in 1956, but more importantly for our purposes, it cites Samuel Lubell as saying:

Reporter Richard Lyons of The Washington Post concluded that, in all the cities they studied, Ike won a greater percentage of the black vote than he did in 1952. The biggest impact of the Negro switch was felt in the South. In some northern cities the change was “hardly measurable” and the “overriding issue was civil rights.” African Americans switched in far greater numbers in the South because southern Democrats were opposed to civil rights, whereas in the North they were generally for it. Lyons argued that “Negroes can take credit for holding Tennessee for President Eisenhower. Their switches in Memphis alone were far more than his statewide margin.” Samuel Lubell concluded that “in the northern cities Eisenhower’s gain over 1952 was 8 percent while in the South the same Southern Negro wards and precincts which gave Eisenhower 19 percent of their vote in 1952 gave him 47 per cent in 1956.”

Unfortunately, it doesn't say how well Stevenson did among Southern Blacks in 1956, but given the very low third party share at that election (South Carolina exempted, and in South Carolina the Third Party Voters were staunch segregationists so not a very black demographic) I am pretty sure Stevenson won Southern Blacks, even in 1956, and that was after winning them handily in 1952 with a segregationist running mate, and even in 1956 he would have won them handily nationwide. Just goes to show you the absurd strength of the New Deal Coalition I guess.