What's with states like OK and LA?

[Gustaf]

Registered Dems by birth, haven't bothered to change it...

[Gustaf]

Hockey Dude,

There's a HUGE difference between Southern Democrats and real Democrats. Southern Democrats are right wing on foreign policy issues, moderate on social issues and populists when it comes to economic issues...which is pretty much where the Democratic Party stood from 1932 to 1964 when they dominated American politics. But today's REAL Democrats are Internationalist appeasers on issues pertaining to foreign policy and far left on social issues, and neither of those positions will fly with Southern Democrats.

Southern Democrats seem to be Republicans to me, what's the difference?

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

The Southern Democrats are less conservative on social issues than rank and file Republicans, and they might be more suspectible to class envy populism...that's the biggest difference.

But when it comes to foreign policy...yes...they are pretty much Republicans.

Take someone like Breaux, who I heard supported the Bush tax cuts. He's Republican on social issues. He's Republican on economy. He's Republican on foreign policy. I don't get all the "The Democrats are losing the Southern wing of the party"-talk, I mean are they really Democrats in any meaningful sense?

[Gustaf]

Gustaf,

Breaux may have voted with the Republicans on some issues, but he's not nearly as conservative overall on economic and social issues, though I would call him closer to the Republican base than he is to the Democratic base nationally.

It still seems to me like he, and many others, are closer to the GOP on all major issues, even though they night well be more moderate.

[Gustaf]

Let me break it down for all of yall, being from Louisiana. Southern Democrats are conservative on social issues. On economic issues they are more in line with the Democrats. But in a national election we cant choose a real Southern Democrat, so we go for the Republican, rather than the far left nutjob who could care less about the issues of the working man. Bill Clinton and Al Gore are not Southern Democrats. Another reason is because you have to be registered Democrat to vote in primaries for Democrats. To vote in Republican primaries you can be either. Thats why people register that way.

How come Clinton won LA twice then, with 46% and 52% respectively?

[Gustaf]

registered democrats int eh south are in no way like national democrats.  Gov Blanco ran very much to the right of the national Dem party.

Sh eis pro life and against gun control.

Same with Sen LAndrieau she ran saying she voted with President Buish like 70+% of the time.

In that case I simply don't understand why they're Democrats.  

Thank you! That's what I've been saying all along!

And on Oklahoma, I will agree with the local...it seems to me that OK follows the voting patterns of Western Farm States like Kansas and Nebraska rather than that of other Southern states.

[Gustaf]

registered democrats int eh south are in no way like national democrats.  Gov Blanco ran very much to the right of the national Dem party.

Sh eis pro life and against gun control.

Same with Sen LAndrieau she ran saying she voted with President Buish like 70+% of the time.

In that case I simply don't understand why they're Democrats.  

Thank you! That's what I've been saying all along!

And on Oklahoma, I will agree with the local...it seems to me that OK follows the voting patterns of Western Farm States like Kansas and Nebraska rather than that of other Southern states.

But the Western Farm states and the South vote exactly alike don't they?

No, not at all. The Western Farm states are much more Republican, for one thing. Bush got above 60% in NE, OK, ND and SD. As in WY, ID and UT. He didn't get above 60% in any Southern state.  

[Gustaf]

registered democrats int eh south are in no way like national democrats.  Gov Blanco ran very much to the right of the national Dem party.

Sh eis pro life and against gun control.

Same with Sen LAndrieau she ran saying she voted with President Buish like 70+% of the time.

In that case I simply don't understand why they're Democrats.  

Thank you! That's what I've been saying all along!

And on Oklahoma, I will agree with the local...it seems to me that OK follows the voting patterns of Western Farm States like Kansas and Nebraska rather than that of other Southern states.

But the Western Farm states and the South vote exactly alike don't they?

No, not at all. The Western Farm states are much more Republican, for one thing. Bush got above 60% in NE, OK, ND and SD. As in WY, ID and UT. He didn't get above 60% in any Southern state.  

Oh right.  Well the farm states are almost exactly like the South except for the African-American population.  

In 1976 Carter swept the South, but lost all the farm states. The farm states have not voted Democrat more than once since WWII, and that was in the LBJ landslide of 1964.

[Gustaf]

Gusaf, the reason why most Southerners goes back to the Civil War.
Most Southern Democrats are socially conservative, but on economic issues are social democrats.

BTW neither Blanco or Jindal ran on "national" platforms.

Yeah, I know, and I also thought that Southern Democrats were to the left on economy, but then I read that this guy Breaux appareantly supported Bush ecnomic policy, and then there seemed to be very little left...apart from nostalgia, I guess.

[Gustaf]

KS and NE were the only states to give Nixon above 60% in 1960.

KS was the only state to give Dewey more than 60% in 1944.

And so on. The farm states have been Republican since WWI, the South doesn't belong to any party, they vote after more regional patterns, against the Northeast, which makes them GOP right now. But not even MS or AL are as heavily Republican as NE and WY, for example.

[Gustaf]

because that is what the dem party used to be, for tax cuts and strong nat'l defense ( ie John kennedy) but now they have shifted way left after the 60's.

registered democrats int eh south are in no way like national democrats.  Gov Blanco ran very much to the right of the national Dem party.

Sh eis pro life and against gun control.

Same with Sen LAndrieau she ran saying she voted with President Buish like 70+% of the time.

In that case I simply don't understand why they're Democrats.  

What's the difference between that Democratic party and the Republican party of today? Or the Republican party of back then, for that matter...

[Gustaf]

NH and northern New England is politically opposite from the south. We are socially liberal, have a high rate of college educated voters, and are fiscal conservatives. Southern democrats are fiscal moderates, social conservatives, and less educated in general.

Yeah, I would believe what you just said, but with differing opinon as to why. You guys are politically opposite from southerners because of the diluted values that have taken place in your region over the years. Your region also used to have the same values system 200 years ago, but who changed? Not us...In regards to each of your points;

SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE: Religion and morals do not take much stock in your platform, even though most of the country considers itself "religious". The South has always had respect for the structure and guidance given by morals and values.

EDUCATION: The reason you are more educated goes directly to your comment about being politically opposite. The education system is run by Liberals that program their beliefs into your learning. It has been going on for so long you don't even feel the change. You may have more educated people in New England than us southern "folk", but we are more closely aligned to what the rest of the country believes.

FISCAL: We are just as, if not more fiscally conservative than northerners. The tax and spend types come from the DEM party and your region, REMEMBER?

Since Bush was born in the Northeast you mean?

[Gustaf]

In North carolina, Democrats outnumber Republican 2,388,679 to 1,712,992 (48-24%)

Your math's not so good, miami.  Those numbers/percentages don't make sense, maybe you meant 48%-34%?

If the total is about 4 millions, as these nubmers indicate, 2.3 millions would be more than 50%. If you don't know the total you can't tell the percentages...only that the Dem number can't be twice that of the Rep number so 48-24 must be wrong.

[Gustaf]

In North carolina, Democrats outnumber Republican 2,388,679 to 1,712,992 (48-24%)

Your math's not so good, miami.  Those numbers/percentages don't make sense, maybe you meant 48%-34%?

If the total is about 4 millions, as these nubmers indicate, 2.3 millions would be more than 50%. If you don't know the total you can't tell the percentages...only that the Dem number can't be twice that of the Rep number so 48-24 must be wrong.

nc state board of elections 10/03 says 48%-34%

OK...then I guess it probably is...