The New Semi-Solid South?

The New Semi-Solid South?

Agenda Barry Goldwater The South Becoming Republican
The Southern Strategy The Flipping of the Southern Senate The Curious Case of Virginia & Florida New Semi-Solid South?

Republicans in the South 1964-present
Following the nomination of Barry Goldwater in 1964 the Republicans became the dominant party in the South Started first on the Presidential level, then Senate, then House, the Governor, then Legislatures The last Democratic legislatures flipped in 2010, the first flipped in the 1990’s

Barry Goldwater Why did the South embrace Goldwater? His opposition to Civil Rights/Voting Rights while Johnson championed Civil Rights/Voting Rights Many Republicans did NOT want Goldwater as the nominee, felt he was too far-right, especially on race George Romney in letters and speeches to and about Goldwater: “You were just about to take a position the 1964 Civil Rights Act contrary to that of most elected Republicans in and out of Congress, and there were disturbing indications that your strategists proposed to make an all-out push for the Southern white segregationist vote and to attempt to exploit the so-called ‘white backlash’...” “The real challenge for us lies in the expansion of voter support for the Republican party in all parts of the country, urban or rural, North or South, colored or white”

Never Goldwater Barry Goldwater entered the Convention without a majority of pledged delegates Opposition from numerous sources, including Sen. Rockefeller and Gov. Scranton “Looking to the future of the party, it would be a tragedy if Sen. Goldwater’s views, as previously stated, were not challenged and repudiated.” Convention delegate who flipped from Goldwater to Scranton was yelled at: “You’re ni**er lovers – communists!” Henry Cabot Lodge Jr, “What in God’s name has happened to the Republican Party?”

Barry Goldwater “Goldwater doesn’t have a racist bone in his body, but he got the votes of every racist” But he wasn’t above using race to his advantage...

Rise of Republicans on the Presidential Level
The South shifted to Republican territory with only Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton winning deep South states Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were both Southerners We will come back to these two What caused the South to flip so strongly towards Republicans when Barry Goldwater was not on the ticket? The Southern Strategy

Southern Strategy Strategy was for the Republican Party to use the issue of race to drive conservative whites away from the Democratic Party and towards the Republican Party Strategy was popularized by Nixon and Nixon’s aide Kevin Phillips

Southern Strategy Phillips was very open about this strategy, telling the New York Times in 1970: “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”

Southern Strategy The key of the Southern Strategy was getting the vote of conservative whites by appealing to them on the issue of race BUT you cannot openly endorse racism or white supremacy Direct appeals to racism would alienate the rest of the country Nixon chief of staff Haldeman: “[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks. The key is to devise a system that recognized this while not appearing to.”

Southern Strategy How do Republicans appeal to conservative whites on the issue of race without directly saying so? “State’s Rights,” busing, law and order, etc.

Southern Strategy Reagan endorses the Southern Strategy and uses it too Gave his “state’s rights speech” in Neshoba County Mississippi Where? Location was just a few miles from the infamous Civil Rights murders Honestly, and strangely, it was a coincidence According to the NYT: in December 1979 the Republican national committeeman from Mississippi wrote a letter urging that the party’s nominee speak at the Neshoba Country Fair, just outside the town where three civil rights workers had been murdered in It would, he wrote, help win over “George Wallace inclined voters.” Advisor Lee Atwater explained the strategy in 1981

Southern Strategy Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [Reagan] doesn't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster... Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps? Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Ni**er, ni**er, ni**er." By 1968 you can't say "ni**er" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Ni**er, ni**er.”

Southern Strategy State’s Rights – is it racist? Is everyone who uses the phrase making an appeal to racism? Or is it a legitimate political position that also happens to be popular with racists? What about other issues that are not necessarily about race? Such as welfare? Reagan on the ‘welfare queen,’: “She used 80 names, 30 addresses, 15 telephone numbers to collect food stamps, Social Security, veterans’ benefits for four nonexistent deceased veteran husbands, as well as welfare. Her tax-free cash income alone has been running $150,000 a year.” Polls and focus groups found that Southern whites identified her as a black woman

Southern Strategy Does this mean that everyone who switched from Democrat to Republican in the South were racists? NO! But you cannot deny that race and race-issues were big The Republican Party appealed to many Southerners on economic issues, Vietnam, welfare – as well as on racial issues To overwhelm decades of never voting Republican, it takes all the above to finally cause a flip And this flip started just with the President and “national” Democrats vs. “national” Republicans

The Southern Strategy Today
Ken Mehlman, RNC chief in 2005: “Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization... I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.” Bush spokesman Scott McClellan: “Ken said it was wrong to try and benefit from racial polarization. We agree fully.”

Senate 89th Congress (1965-1967) Alabama: 2 Dems
North Carolina: 2 Dems Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 2 Dems Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Dems Mississippi: 2 Dems

North Carolina: 2 Dems Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 1 Dem/1 Rep Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Dems Mississippi: 2 Dems

Senate 91st Congress (1969-1971) Alabama: 2 Dems
North Carolina: 2 Dems Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 1 Dem/1 Rep Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Dems Mississippi: 2 Dems

Senate 92nd Congress (1971-1973) Alabama: 2 Dems
North Carolina: 2 Dems Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Ind./1 Dem Mississippi: 2 Dems

Senate 93rd Congress (1973-1975) Alabama: 2 Dems
North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Ind./1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Dems

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Ind./1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Dems

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 1 Dem/1 Rep Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Ind./1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Dems

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 1 Dem/1 Rep Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Ind./1 Rep Mississippi: 1 Dem/1 Rep

Senate 97th Congress (1981-1983) Alabama: 1 Dem/1 Rep
North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 1 Dem/1 Rep Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Ind./1 Rep Mississippi: 1 Dem/1 Rep

North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 1 Dem/1 Rep Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Reps Mississippi: 1 Dem/1 Rep

North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Dems Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Reps Mississippi: 1 Dem/1 Rep

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 2 Dems Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Reps Mississippi: 1 Dem/1 Rep

Senate 101st Congress (1989-1991) Alabama: 2 Dems
North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Dems Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Reps

Senate 102nd Congress (1991-1993) Alabama: 2 Dems
North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Dems Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Reps

Senate 103rd Congress (1993-1995) Alabama: 2 Dems
North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Dems Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 1 Dem/1 Rep Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Reps

Senate 105th Congress (1997-1999) Alabama: 2 Reps
North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 1 Dem/1 Rep South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 1 Dem/1 Rep South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Mississippi: 1 Dem/1 Rep

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 1 Dem/1 Rep South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Dems Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Reps Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Florida: 2 Dems Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 2 Dems Virginia: 2 Reps Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 2 Reps Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Reps Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 1 Dem/1 Rep Virginia: 2 Reps Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 2 Reps Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Reps Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 1 Dem/1 Rep Virginia: 1 Dem/1 Rep Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 2 Dems South Carolina: 2 Reps Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Reps Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 1 Dem/1 Rep Virginia: 2 Dems Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 1 Dem/1 Rep Arkansas: 1 Dem/1 Rep South Carolina: 2 Reps Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Reps Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 1 Dem/1 Rep Virginia: 2 Dems Mississippi: 2 Reps

North Carolina: 2 Reps Arkansas: 2 Reps South Carolina: 2 Reps Florida: 1 Dem/1 Rep Tennessee: 2 Reps Georgia: 2 Reps Texas: 2 Reps Louisiana: 2 Reps Virginia: 2 Dems Mississippi: 2 Reps

Rise of Southern Republicans
What trends do we see? Deep South took longer to break into Some states, Florida, seem to go back and forth between the parties Once states fully went Republican they rarely went back Early on deep South states responded to national trends Now? Deep South is seemingly immune from national trends and is just strongly Republican Arkansas and Louisiana held onto the Democratic Party for dear life Hmm interesting trend in Virginia...

A New Solid South? Is the South today a new Solid South?
Republicans dominate on the Presidential, Senate, Governor, House, Legislative level Last year any Southern state had a Democratic Governor: AL-2003, AR-2015, GA-2003, FL-1999, LA-present, MS-2004, NC-present, SC-2003, TN-2003, TX-1995, VA-present

A New Solid South? Two states stand out from this “New Solid South”
Florida & Virginia

Number of Times States Vote Dem. (1972-2016)
Alabama: 1/12 (‘76) North Carolina: 2/12 (‘08) Arkansas: 3/12 (‘96) South Carolina: 1/12 (‘76) Florida: 4/12 (‘12) Tennessee: 3/12 (‘96) Georgia: 3/12 (‘92) Texas: 1/12 (‘76) Louisiana: 3/12 (‘96) Virginia: 3/12 (‘16) Mississippi: 1/12 (‘76)

A New Solid South? In the old Solid South there was one state that would occasionally vote Republican for President/Governor: Tennessee Florida is almost not a Southern state anymore, it is a national swing state – more in common with Pennsylvania or Colorado than with the rest of the South

Florida Florida used to be just as deep-South as Alabama and Georgia
One of the original 7 of the Confederacy What changed to make them the “swing” state they are today? Florida first voted Republican in 1928 Like the rest of the Rim South Voted twice for Eisenhower, and voted for Nixon in Was one of LBJ’s closest wins in ‘64 (51.15%) Idaho was closer with LBJ at 50.92%

Florida While most of the Rim South (Texas, Tennessee, North Carolina, etc.) voted Republican earlier than the Deep South, once they flipped Republican they stayed Republican Only exception being when a Southerner is on the ballot: Carter in ‘76, Clinton in ‘92 and ’96 Yet Florida voted Democratic in 2008 and 2012, and even before that was closer than any Southern state in 2000 and 2004 Florida is also the ONLY Southern state to have never had 2 Republican Senators serve at the same time

Florida 1952 Election

Florida The Panhandle of Florida was essentially the Deep South – voted strongly Democratic before 1964 and then in 1964 flipped completely for Goldwater Home of the Wallace-voters The rest of Florida was much more like the rest of the country/Rim South, effected by national trends Let’s skip ahead...

Florida Why is Florida competitive today when before it was just like the Rim South? The big cities The cities in Florida like Miami used to vote Republican in the 50’s and 60’s, now they vote Democratic Florida has enough urban areas and population in the Miami area to counter the more “Southern” parts of the state Tennessee has big cities, but Memphis and Nashville are not large enough to counter the rural parts of the state We will come back to this in a few slides...

The Curious Case of Virginia
Virginia has voted Democratic for President in the past 3 elections – in 2016 becoming the only Southern state to do so Has sent 2 Democrats to the Senate since 2009 Virginia – the home of Richmond – is now essentially not Southern!!!! How did this happen???

The Curious Case of Virginia
Northern Virginia

Northern Virginia

Northern Virginia 2008 Election
Obama: 52.63% McCain: 46.33%

Obama: 51.16% Romney: 47.28%

Clinton: 49.75% Trump: 44.43%

Northern Virginia But, Northern Virginia has not always been Democratic – 2000 election Gore: 44.44% Bush: 52.47%

Northern Virginia But watch Northern Virginia in 2004 Kerry: 45.48%
Bush: 53.68%

Northern Virginia What has changed? What has caused it to shift Democratic? Population change Percent of Virginia Population from Northern Virginia by Census year/estimate: 1970 – 20.16% 1980 – 20.70% 1990 – 23.70% 2000 – 25.64% 2010 – 27.88% 2016 – 29.18%

Northern Virginia As Northern Virginia becomes larger it is becoming more Democratic – Democrats nationwide dominate urban areas

Urban vs. Rural Based on Census definition, how urban/rural is each Southern state? Based on population AL: 59% (42nd) AR: 56.2% (45th) FL: 91.2% (6th) GA: 75.1% (23rd) LA: 73.2% (27th) MS: 49.3% (47th) NC: 66.1% (36th) SC: 66.3% (34th) TN 66.4% (33rd) TX: 84.7% (15th) 75.5% (22nd) Based on Urban Density AL: 49th AR: 42nd FL: 16th GA: 41st LA: 39th MS: 47th NC: 46th SC: 48th TN 43rd TX: 13th VA: 18th

2006 Virginia Election Incumbent Republican George Allen vs. Democrat Jim Webb Webb – moderate, former Secretary of the Navy under Reagan Allen – planned to run for President in 2008 Macaca incident

2006 Virginia Election Previous Democratic victories in Virginia (like Chuck Robb) relied on rural white voters who had not yet abandoned the Democratic Party Webb relied on NoVa

1994 Chuck Robb Victory Fairfax county was a swing-county, ran close with Republican Oliver North in the middle and southern parts of the state

Virginia vs. Florida Similarities and differences between the two
Urbanization and population growth had an impact, but differently Virginia was steady and then a BOOM in population in NoVa caused a flip to the Democrats Florida was ALWAYS one of the most urbanized states in the South Florida became competitive because those urban areas shifted from voting Republican to Democratic

Virginia vs. Florida Percent of Florida’s total population from South Florida (Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach) 1960: 30.2% 1970: 32.9% 1980: 33.0% 1990: 31.4% 2000: 31.3% 2010: 29.6% Virginia became more urban, Florida has remained steadily urban

A New Solid South? Is there a New Solid South? I would argue NO
What do you think? I would argue NO The Democratic Party in the South today is FAR more competitive than the Republican Party was, even in the final days of the old Solid South This is true even if you exclude Florida and Virginia

A New Solid South? Every Southern state has at least 1 Democratic member of Congress Usually a majority-minority district Governor and Senate races are very competitive, far more than they ever were in the 1950’s or 1960’s During the old Solid South the most “Republican” state was Tennessee – today Virginia and Florida are both more Democratic than Tennessee was ever Republican The South might lean Republican, but it is not solid

The Future? What is the South’s future? Well look at Virginia
North Carolina is very very similar to Virginia, and Georgia is not too dissimilar from North Carolina... BUT neither state is as “urban” as Virginia or Florida... Texas however is Democrats are eyeing the states to try to turn them “purple” or “blue-ish” like Virginia Will they be successful? How will Republicans respond?

Any Questions? You, what’s your question?

The New Semi-Solid South?

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The New Semi-Solid South?"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

The New Semi-Solid South?

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The New Semi-Solid South?"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback