Republicans win elections by fearmongering. They actually had people in Bumfuck, Georgia scared that Osama Bin Laden was going to attack them.. BUY YOUR DUCT TAPE. OMG WE ARE ON ORANGE ALERT (what does that mean?). OMG I SAW JANET JACKSONS BREAST! SAVE THE FETUS! LIBERALS WANT TO KILL GOD! (Faux News Flash! Attack on Christmas/Easter/10 Commandments/St. Crispins Day!) WE CANT LET GAYS MARRY BECAUSE THEN WE ALL MIGHT TURN GAY. (Apparently, a good portion of the US, especially the South and MidWest clings onto the playground science of Gayness being transmitted like "cooties")
This might be a tad off topic, but this paragraph is ridiculous. While some people definitely have some very conservative views down here in the South, the thought of us being scared that Osama is going to attack is comical. Most of the "Bumfuck, Georgia" residents would gladly welcome him to try, while they chased him down with their pitch forks and shotguns.

If you think it's fear and paranoia like that which is causing the South to vote conservative, you're even farther from the mark than Kerry's crew was.

If you think it's fear and paranoia like that which is causing the South to vote conservative, you're even farther from the mark than Kerry's crew was.

So what was it that made them think Bush was the lesser evil, Sanchek?

loudmouth short guy with an inferiority complex of the world who just happens to have nukes to keep all the big tough badasses at bay

Umm...what other country can deploy even 1/3 of the military force the US can anywhere in the world? I'll buy the loudmouth thing....but we are more like "The Rock" than a short guy with an inferiority complex.

My point to this thread is I'm baffled on Bush's goals on Bolton's appointment. Other than pulling completely out of the UN, his appointment makes no sense...if anything he will make relations with the rest of the world worse....not that it can get much worse.

Well.. all you need southern boys need is pitchforks and shotguns? GREAT!
http://www.dhs.alabama.gov/PDFs/FY05hsgp.pdf
How about Alabama gives back the 28 million they got for Anti Terrorism.
Arizona gives back the 41 million
Georgia gives back the 54 Million
Tennesse gives back the 32 Million
South Carolina 26Million.
ect.. ect... ect...

what a joke (http://www.homelandsecurity.alabama.gov/)

The South is what it is.. and yes, it has always voted by and large for the dumbest reasons possible.
The Republican party is doing well by rehashing over and over again the Southern Strategy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy). The Deomcrats had power almost exclusively because they controlled the southern vote. They did this because of the "Dixie-crats".
People dont give Lyndon Johnson enough credit imo. He rammed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through even though he KNEW it would shatter the Democratic party. After that, the south went Republican pretty quickly, relatively speaking (1 Generation)

So dont give the bullshit that the Republican base isnt built on fear. Because thats the foundation of it. The South was always scared shitless of black people. How easy to turn that ingrained attitude toward Terrorism or gays.

It has always been at its heart fear and paranoia. You can dress it up or deny it if you want, but the facts speak for themselves.
Evolution of the Southern Strategy

As civil rights grew more accepted throughout the nation, basing a general election strategy on appeals to "states' rights" as a naked play against civil rights laws grew less effective; there was a greater danger of a national backlash. In addition, the idea of "states' rights" gained a broader meaning than simply a reference to civil rights laws, eventually encompassing federalism and a general aversion to national intervention in the culture wars. Nevertheless, in 1980, when Ronald Reagan initiated his general election campaign after accepting the Republican Party nomination, he did so with a speech in which he stated his support of states' rights. He did so at a county fair in Neshoba County, Mississippi, which was also known as the place where three civil rights advocates were murdered in 1964. Reagan went on to make a speech praising Jefferson Davis, the strongly pro-slavery president of the Confederacy and states' rights advocate, at Stone Mountain, Georgia, site of the founding of the modern Klan. A prominent Klan leader endorsed Reagan, but he disavowed the endorsement and moved to neutralize any negative publicity by securing the support of noted Southern civil rights activists Hosea Williams and Ralph David Abernathy.

An appeal to racism may have played a role in subsequent Republican races for the House and Senate in the South. The Willie Horton commercials used by supporters of George H.W. Bush in the election of 1988 may also have been such an appeal. Other examples include the 1990 re-election campaign of Jesse Helms, which attacked his opponent's alleged support of "racial quotas." Many ardent Democratic party supporters claim that support for federalism in the Republican party platform is, and always has been, nothing but a code word for racism, a charge Republicans consistently deny. Such allegations typically peak after a racially charged controversy involving Republicans, such as Senator Trent Lott's supportive remarks at Thurmond's hundredth birthday celebration.

Leaving aside all questions of race, the Republicans have continued to modify the Southern strategy, and to use it not only within the South, but in conservative areas of the Midwest and other regions. As racism became less politically palatable as a lone motivator, it was augmented by divisions based on other cultural issues like abortion, school prayer, or funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. These cultural differences are emphasized rather than economic issues including tariffs, federal job spending, and so on (with the single exception of taxes). They play on perceived and actual cultural differences between the South and other parts of the nation; the South is seen as more religious and traditional than, say, New England. An example of this new iteration of the Southern strategy can be seen in this quote from Pat Buchanan, a famously conservative political pundit, in which he denounces John Kerry (the 2004 Democratic contender for President) as:

...a Massachusetts liberal who voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, backs civil unions for homosexuals, voted to defend the infanticide known as partial-birth abortion and wants to raise the federal income taxes that George Bush lowered. [1]

The strategy can be seen in the phrase "Massachusetts liberal", emphasizing Kerry's alleged cultural alienness to the South, and in the emphasis on cultural, rather than economic, issues. A 2004 book by Thomas Frank, entitled What's the Matter with Kansas?, revolves around the rise of cultural issues as a Republican strategy.

So what was it that made them think Bush was the lesser evil, Sanchek?
Obviously, I can't speak for everyone in Georgia, but between the conservative people I know here in Atlanta and the people I know where I grew up (certified Bumfuck, Georgia country), I think there's a pretty strong consensus that we just didn't have the slightest confidence in Kerry's ability to lead. He never seemed to even have a personality of his own. Bush clearly has some issues, but at least you know what you're getting. These aren't times when a wishy washy leader like Kerry will get the job done.

I'm sure there was plenty of party-line voting and the like, but it certainly wasn't due to anyone here being afraid Osama was going to show up and blow up their cow farm. Not by a long shot.

Though, I think I'd probably trade Bush for more Clinton if I could.

Interesting tangent we've split off on, can we make it's own thread so it can get the proper attention?

Btw, I'm a moderate and I don't see the fear angle anymore than I see the Democratics claim to fame..."Fight against it all, but offer no alternatives" angle.

Fandros

Well.. all you need southern boys need is pitchforks and shotguns? GREAT!
http://www.dhs.alabama.gov/PDFs/FY05hsgp.pdf
How about Alabama gives back the 28 million they got for Anti Terrorism.
Arizona gives back the 41 million
Georgia gives back the 54 Million
Tennesse gives back the 32 Million
South Carolina 26Million.
ect.. ect... ect...
Uh? Let's keep ect [sic] ect ecting that out then.

Georgia's spending 54m this year. Well, New Jersey's spending 60m. Seriously, who would attack anything in Jersey when NY is right next door?

Michigan is spending more than Tennessee and South Carolina combined.

California and New York (clearly a stronghold of conservatism) are spending just barely under 600 Million combined.

Arizona (not really much of a Southern state) may be spending 41m, but Washington state's spending 45m.

The point is, everyone's covering their bases. If you look at the land mass of the states and the number of large cities and other potential targets in them, the spending is pretty even across the North and South both. I'm not seeing any fear here, just prevention. If taking steps to prevent anymore incidents anywhere on our soil is un-founded, irrational fear, then I suggest you focus your efforts on convicing New York and California to give back that ~20% of the total budget.

As long you try to find a single reason people voted a certain way, you are dooming yourself to not understanding the issue. In my experience, most people don't really sit down and critically think when they vote, they use a process that could be described as social interia. So while you are correct in that the GOP has succesfully gotten the southeast US into their voting bloc, it's not something they did two weeks before the election with a single spending bill but instead a 50 year process, and to look for the smoking gun of why the South voted for Bush is a waste of time.

Also I really wish you red/blue state morons would notice that on a district level there is rarely below 30% dissenting votes and apply your own (obviously limited) critical thinking skills to that instead of buying into everything you read. Alternatively, if you want to look for a smoking gun I would suggest visiting the Kerry campaign office, should find several spent rounds with which they shot themselves in the foot.

Malse makes a valid point, I am from Texas and wasnt planning on voting for Bush or Kerry until after the debates. During the first debate Kerry did nothing to impress me, and having dealt with Bush for a few years already he did better than I expected him to. in the Second debate Kerry looked inept, his point was that I am not Bush and that wasnt a valid argument in my mind or my wifes. She is a conservative Democrat just like I am a liberal Republican and neither of us voted for either parties candidate, both went liberterian this time. Bush had not done a good job in her mind, and she didnt think Kerry would do any better. but neither of us sits at home with Duct tape on the windows or any of that other crap. LL reasoning is that anyone that voted against his candidate must be a dumb hillbilly is just another reason southerners have been voting for the Republican candidates as of late, the Liberal (not democrates) try to vilify anyone who is in the south as dumb inbreed uneducated morons, and it doesnt play well.

Rev

Well I for one don't think everyone from the south is stupid....no matter how funny they talk. ;)

I still can't fathom how anyone voted for Bush based on my personal criteria, but understand that others have different criteria that somehow compelled them to vote for a ....comments deleted.....hole. :)

Of course had Dean been the Democrats canidtae, I just would have hidden on election day, crying like a little girl in a closet.

The fact that Bush's campaign people in the first of his two presidential campaigns set up a phone bank in the Carolinas to call and notify potential voters that candidate McCain had a "black" adopted child speaks volumes about the need these people have to demonize and fear monger; they have nothing of substance to boast of, so instead they look for things to attack to deflect attention.

Frankly, I have seen nothing since that campaign to give me any faith in Bush as a competent leader. He is a petty man, with a great supporting cast of players who feed into his pettiness. Fortunately, there are still enough rational and forward thinking people in the party to keep it from becoming completely irrelevant. But it is going to remain a struggle for the next decade at least, as long as most folks have to wait to hear the morning radio talk show before they can frame an opinion on an issue.

This might be a tad off topic, but this paragraph is ridiculous. While some people definitely have some very conservative views down here in the South, the thought of us being scared that Osama is going to attack is comical.

The notion that Kerry would "ban the Bible" is also comical. And it was also part of the Republican campaign strategy in Arkansas and West Virginia. Certainly, the Bible belt is ripe for Republican picking at the moment, though the Dems have made a few slight inroads in the last year on environmental and poverty relief platforms.

And fear mongering was, in fact, a tremendous part of the Republican campaign strategy. Tom Ridge (former head of DoHS) has stated that the White House increased terror alerts without apparent cause, and we know that Bush's approval rating often spiked at those times. There's the whole "buy your duct tape now!" campaign, and Cheney's assertion that if Kerry was elected, bin Laden would be happy and we'd be attacked again. Obviously, fear mongering wasn't the sole reason for Kerry's loss (and Kerry played a significant role in his own defeat), but it proved both salient and effective.

The fact that Bush's campaign people in the first of his two presidential campaigns set up a phone bank in the Carolinas to call and notify potential voters that candidate McCain had a "black" adopted child speaks volumes about the need these people have to demonize and fear monger; they have nothing of substance to boast of, so instead they look for things to attack to deflect attention.
Heh, Rove's whispering campaigns also painted McCain's wife as a drug addict and the senator himself as driven half mad by his years as a POW. Were there a Hell, Rove would be hired. He's an exceptional dirty politician, once the learner to Atwater, now the master.

This isnt about Bush or Kerry.
Bush sucked less than Kerry.


Uh? Let's keep ect [sic] ect ecting that out then.
Uh... So I guess you DO need more than Pitchforks and shotguns. Dont change the topic because you are wrong that people in South arent afraid of Terrorism. Give the money back. GEORGIA is on Orange Alert!
Oh and the money.. why dont you take a look at how its actually being spent. On things and in places that make no sense. Why? because when it comes right to it, there is no ACTUAL threat to those places.
It is all "feel good" money.
First you get everyone scared of the boogieman, then you tell everyone that you protected them from it.

Malse, you are absolutly right. This isnt about one election. But do a serious look at why the South is so solidly Republican. It all comes back to LBJ and Nixon.
Is everyone a racist in the south? No of course not. And not everyone votes for the same reasons. But in elections we arent talking about individuals, we are talking about groups and finding the greatest common theme.
Like it or not, there is much more racism in the South than in the Northeast. Its a far more segregated society. Now racism is on the decline everywhere, even the south, so youll notice the slight of hand that they did, replacing blacks with homosexuals as the "wink" enemy. How many openly gay southern politicans are there? Lets say the most brilliant politican in the world was gay jewish man, what are his chances of winning an election in Texas? Maybe better in Dallas than in Galveston, but still pretty unlikely. (The example disqualifies itself to some extent as even a dumb politican wouldnt run in Texas if he were Gay and Jewish)

I dont mind Bush so much. I didnt vote for him because I dont believe in rewarding failure, but in the end he was prolly the better choice over Kerry. Either way, we were getting a sack of turds, just one had 8 pounds and other had 10.
Im more interested in the Tom Delays and Bill Frists.

Arizona, not realy part of "The South" spends it's money primarily along our 400 or so miles of international border and that pesky Sky Harbor Airport, which has more daily operations than LAX (http://www.myafd.com/top10/Busiest_Airports.asp).

...or so I'd guess.

Thing I have against the current leaders of the Democratic party is they are , by inlarge, a reactionary party. And at this moment in our country we need to be more proactive.

Fandros

You're both missing the point of what I'm saying. Sure, Rove used all kinds of dirt slinging, but neither party confined their denigrating to a certain geographic area of the country. They targeted each demographic with what would work best, but it's hardly as if the South is the only place people were manipulated into a vote.

Honestly, I really don't care if either party back stabbed the other. It's just the reality of the political machines we've all allowed to mature over the years. I think they're both chock full of morons that care disproportionally more about the politics of their means than the worth of the ends they achieve.

But, to claim that those of us in the South are somehow more predisposed to being blindly manipulated by smear campaigns is just as prejudicial as the supposed racism that thrives down here (I don't see that anywhere I go, personally). That, I take exception to.

IMO there is a more definite divide between areas with high population densities than north vs south. The big cities tend to vote "blue", the rural areas tend to vote "red". All scare tactics aside, that seems to be pretty immutable.

Having lived the better part of my life as a Southerner (and almost the entirety of my family tree), mistrust/dislike of the federal government plays a large part in the way many Southerners vote.

The people of Alabama, Texas, South Carolina, etc. don't want the people of New York, California, etc. telling them how to live, what constitutes obscenity, what constitutes the beginning of "life", what constitutes separation of church and state, and so on.

You can call it fear if you want but the Republican party has done a much better job at selling the message that it's more in favor of getting big government the hell out of your life (whether that's factually true can certainly be argued). Lower taxes. State rights. Personal accountability (welfare reform). And that's a message that resonates particularly well with Southerners. To some extent it's a continuation of the civil war and whichever party is perceived as being "against federal government" wins for the South.

TLets say the most brilliant politican in the world was gay jewish man, what are his chances of winning an election in Texas? Maybe better in Dallas than in Galveston, but still pretty unlikely. (The example disqualifies itself to some extent as even a dumb politican wouldnt run in Texas if he were Gay and Jewish)


Dallas is more Bible Beltish than any other city in Texas, but ignoring your gross oversimplification of the politics a Gay Jewish man who ran on a platform of reducing taxes, less government intervention, respect for the 1st and 2nd amendments and wasn't a whackjob would have a decent chance at getting a state representative position provided he a) worked the right interest groups and b) made sure he presented his issue platform well instead of letting the campaign be framed about jewish fudgepacking.

I know people like to rank Texas up there with Alabama on the backwards whitefolk scale, but if I was to describe the state with a single word of vice it would be nationalistic -- an upstanding native Gay Jew would beat a White Protestant New Yorker if all other things were equal. There are a number of Texas cultural values that trump race/sexuality, and I'm sure this is true in any other state as well.

I actually do believe at least one of our state house members is gay, there was an article in the paper when he was outed and then everybody realized they didn't care.

This might be a tad off topic, but this paragraph is ridiculous. While some people definitely have some very conservative views down here in the South, the thought of us being scared that Osama is going to attack is comical. Most of the "Bumfuck, Georgia" residents would gladly welcome him to try, while they chased him down with their pitch forks and shotguns.

If you think it's fear and paranoia like that which is causing the South to vote conservative, you're even farther from the mark than Kerry's crew was.

I concurr.

Thing I have against the current leaders of the Democratic party is they are , by inlarge, a reactionary party. And at this moment in our country we need to be more proactive.

Fandros

Me and Fandros agree. Hell must of just frozen over.:o