Reactions to Sen. Rand Paul's Speech at Howard University

"I come to Howard today, not to preach, or prescribe some special formula for you but to say I want a government that leaves you alone, that encourages you to write the book that becomes your unique future."

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) spoke to an audience at the historically black college Howard University yesterday. The junior senator from the Bluegrass State said he wanted to start a conversation between African-American voters and Republicans, who pulled just 7 percent of the black vote in the 2012 presidential race.

Reason TV's Nick Gillespie and Meredith Bragg talked with students and attendees to see what they thought of Paul's talk and his libertarian positions on military intervention, the drug war, sentencing reform, government regulation, and school choice.

About 3 minutes.

Read Paul's remarks here.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to ReasonTV's YouTube Channel to receive notification when new material goes live.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Ken Shultz||

    In defense of some of those later interviewees, there isn't anything Barack Obama could say to get my vote either--even if he were running again.

    Also, from a purely tactical perspective, I think how a candidate is perceived in relation to the black community is important to a lot of swing voters who aren't minorities themselves.

  • sarcasmic||

    there isn't anything Barack Obama could say to get my vote either

    That's only because you're racist.

  • bon829||

    Start working at home with Google! It's by-far the best job Ive had. Last Monday I got a new Alfa Romeo from bringing in $7778. I started this 9 months ago and practically straight away started making more than $83 per hour. I work through this link, Mojo50.com

  • sarcasmic||

    there isn't anything Barack Obama could say to get my vote either

    That's only because you're racist.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Two racists don't make a right.

  • Ken Shultz||

    We're still joking, right?

  • crystal415||

    If you think Kelly`s story is nice, , 5 weaks-ago father in-law basically earnt $7577 putting in an eleven hour week an their house and their classmate's step-aunt`s neighbour was doing this for 9-months and easily made more than $7577 parttime On there computer. follow the guide at this site... fab22.com

  • Tak Kak||

    Exactly, just look at Reagan.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Well the second to last one at least said if he changed all his stances he could get her vote, so that was not as bad an answer....

    Except that she earlier said she was "offended he was allowed to come speak at this university."

  • Ken Shultz||

    I'm sure a lot of students at Howard see it as a refuge from what they see as people working against their interests.

    We don't always enthusiastically embrace people we don't consider libertarian enough around here, either.

  • ||

    We don't exactly get offended that they were allowed to log in and post though.

  • dinkster||

    Mostly I'm offended that they continue expelling CO2

  • Incredulous||

    Apparently she's "offended" by free thinking and open debate. How dare they allow such things at an institution of higher learning in a free society? Does she have nothing but contempt for the first amendment? What a complete imbecile. Unfortunately, she has plenty of company among the sheep who attend our universities.

  • wargames83||

    In defense of the last person, how much would trust someone who suddenly changed all of their views in order to get votes? This outreach comes after the last election showed that the Republican's (white) Southern Strategy no longer works.

  • Denan7||

    "how much would trust someone who suddenly changed all of their views in order to get votes?"...

    You are referring to Obama vis-a-vis gay-marriage, etc., correct?

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Also, from a purely tactical perspective, I think how a candidate is perceived in relation to the black community is important to a lot of swing voters who aren't minorities themselves."

    Rand's tactical instincts seem to be a whole lot better than his father's--or maybe he's just learned from his father's mistakes.

    When Ron does the tactical calculations, he lets himself be marketed in those God awful newsletters to people that were so embarrassing...

    When Rand does the tactical calculations, he ends up at Howard.

  • Brandybuck||

    Just wait until the mainstream media learns out the Ron Paul Curriculum. He lent his name to a Christian Reconstructionist who want to execute gays and kids who talk back to their parents.

    I really like Ron Paul, but damn has he got the wackiest of friends he lends his name to.

  • DarrenM||

    execute ... kids who talk back to their parents.

    That might actually be a popular campaign issue.

  • NeonCat||

    http://notalwaysrelated.com/th.....lips/25781

    Read it, it's a hoot. Or a shame, a damn, damn shame.

  • spyle||

    so everything that is not 100% balanced or appears so because it has not been thoroughly phrased or explained in your mind deserves some type of defense? even something like this? how far has political correctness infested you to display wussy behavior? i say wussy, allow me to explain--the blacks in this video sure as well hell won't appreciate your political correctness, nor care.

  • Tman||

    Pretty much what I expected. There are certain people that will never change their mind regardless of the evidence presented to the contrary. It's just not going to happen.

    But there are others who remain skeptical that all white Republicans are virulent racists, so it's a start I guess.

  • prolefeed||

    Depends on why they are opposed to the candidate. If it is because Rand is an R, then pppth on them. If it is because they disagree with his positions, well, fine. There's no way Biden will ever get my vote, either.

  • Tman||

    I think for some people it comes down to color period, regardless of party.

    Of course when presented with a person like a Thomas Sowell they pretty much do the whole "NANANANANAICANTHEARYOUNANANANA" thing, but as I said above they aren't ever going to change so it's not worth worrying about. I do think Paul is to be commended for appealing to them anyway, as he knows with some he will still be a white racist regardless.

    I will never vote for Biden either, but it's because he's a fucking moron, not because of his party or color.

  • DanD||

    Of course when presented with a person like a Thomas Sowell they pretty much do the whole "NANANANANAICANTHEARYOUNANANANA" thing

    I believe the more common response is "Uncle Tom." Sowell shakes it off like a boss.

  • DarrenM||

    I believe the more common response is "Uncle Tom."

    Expecting someone to believe or behave in a predetermined way because of their race is racist. Treating someone differently because of their race is racist. When you hear cries of "Uncle Tom" you are hearing racists.

  • John C. Randolph||

    The really stupid thing about tossing off "Uncle Tom" as an insult, is that if they ever read the damn book, they'd know that Uncle Tom is a hero. He's a paragon of honesty and courage.

    -jcr

  • Calidissident||

    I think it's more party. White Democrats still get 90% of the black vote, and black Republicans do that much better than white Republicans do

  • Ken Shultz||

    "There are certain people that will never change their mind regardless of the evidence presented to the contrary."

    They didn't come to perceive Republicans as hostile to their interests in a day, and that perception won't go away in just a day, either.

    This really came about as the people who were once considered southern Democrats came into the Republican Party as part of the Reagan Coalition.

    Those old interests that once resisted the end of segregation, etc. all became Republicans, eventually--hell, George W. Bush was a Southern Democrat in the tradition of Lyndon Johnson in every way that mattered...

    You can't live down decades of Republican griefers in a day. If I were them, I wouldn't change my mind about a Republican from Kentucky just because he came and talked to me for one day, either.

  • tarran||

    George W. Bush was a Southern Democrat in the tradition of Lyndon Johnson in every way that mattered

    I always saw Dubya as yet another Rockefeller Republican from New England - ready to improve society through progressive efforts to force people to live better, more virtuous lives.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Johnson launched the Great Society and doubled down on a war in Vietnam to spread democracy.

    George W. Bush expanded Medicare beyond what it had ever been before and launched a war in Iraq to spread democracy.

    It shouldn't be surprising that they were both from Texas. George W. Bush was a Southern Democrat in every way that mattered.

    Don't let his being on the Republican ticket fool you. There wasn't anything Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan about him.

  • yonemoto||

    When he ran in 2008, GWB ran on a platform of "a more humble foreign policy" in reaction to Clinton's adventures in Jugoslavia.

  • Tak Kak||

    2000.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    He didn't exactly exhibit a strong commitment to first principles then.

  • Bill||

    9/11 changed his whole first term (and 2nd term).

    He ran on better relations with Mexico, immigration reform, and small government policies to help the economy (of course, most Repubs say the latter).

  • wargames83||

    "There wasn't anything Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan about him."

    I don't know about that. Reagan's Iran-Contra scandal sounds like something the then Vice President's son might have gone along with.

  • kinnath||

    GHW Bush was a new england republican.

    W was a recovering alcoholic that bought into the idea of social christian conservatism laced progressive compassion to the less fortunate. W wasn't really a Republican in any traditional sense.

  • tarran||

    Actually, that's Rockefeller Republicanism, straight up. All those things are pretty middle of the road when it comes to progressive Yankees.

  • kinnath||

    I stand corrected then.

  • kinnath||

    Well, I have read that the Rockefeller Republicans became the modern Democratic party at the same time the Southern Democrats became the Republican party during the great realignment in the 60s and 70s.

  • David Emami||

    W was a recovering alcoholic that bought into the idea of social christian conservatism laced progressive compassion to the less fortunate.

    The specific doctrine is called "Social Gospel", which started in the last 19th century. Essentially it boils down to "remember that stuff Jesus told his followers to do as individuals? Well, government should act that way, too." It was a significant part of the Progressive Movement. GWB's "compassionate conservatism" was a somewhat watered-down version of it, but it's still around in undiluted form in the person of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and others.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Yep,
    The Social Gospel morphed into progressivism when they lost God.

  • wargames83||

    No, it was already called progressivism before it became secular.

  • wargames83||

    That is true. Prohibition was pushed by the progressive movement.

  • pmains||

    I believe Rothbard would say that it doesn't matter. The Southern populists took over the Democrats, and Northern progressives took over the GOP in the late 19th/early 20th century. Populism, progressivism, whatever you want to call it, are just manifestations of the same inflationist, moralist, big-government philosophy. The great work of the 20th and 21st centuries is for the conservative movement to shake the GOP free from the grips of the Uniparty types.

  • grey||

    Yes. It would be nice if GOP became a synonym for libertarianism. Or vica versa. I don't care, I just know I left red team because I wanted to oppose progressives and beat the word 'we' out of the political conversation.

  • Joao||

    "it's a start, I guess"

    What?

    I don't and have never known any virulent racists. I don't even know any passive racists.

    The start was many decades ago. The fact that we are still talking about race shows just how adept political parties are at dividing and polarizing a minority.

    It also shows the bigger problem: PRIDE. I'm more embarrassed for minorities for being such chumps than of any possible racism in today's society.

  • John C. Randolph||

    I don't and have never known any virulent racists.

    You're lucky. I've met a few, and they are tedious as hell.

    -jcr

  • Bill||

    Yes, my social club has quite a few. Sad thing is I don't even know what they look like, what with the hood covering their face and all ......

  • dinkster||

    Are you a member of the Rotary too?

  • dinkster||

    The racists I've met are entirely unaware of what they are.

  • wargames83||

    Where are you from?

  • TommyCelt||

    Rand's got moxie making this speech in this place.
    If there were a handfulwho looked past "White Republican", I agree it's a start.
    He's definiely positioning a run.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    You can tell the saturation level of identity politics in each of the people polled here by their answers.

  • Loki||

    Yep. And I strongly suspect that the younger woman who said she thought that it was "disgracegul" that he came there to speak and the older woman at the end who said she would never vote him probably didn't even attend his actual speech. Or if they did they just spent the whole time rolling their eyes or texting their BFFs about a what racist homophobe Rand Paul is and what their plans for the weekend are. Even if they listened to him, they almost certaintly didn't hear him.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Notice that the lady who said there wasn't any way she would vote for Rand Paul was older generation.

    I think most of the people who frequent here skew younger. That lady may have been old enough to remember segregation. She may remember MLK getting assassinated. She may remember having been subjected to Jim Crow.

    All that stuff happened before I was born, really. I was a little kid as the White Flight was winding down. We should remember, though, that for an awful lot of baby boomers, segregation isn't something that happened in the history books. The older generation remembers it well.

    If I'd been subjected to Jim Crow and discriminated against so thoroughly, and I associated a certain party with the vestiges of that discrimination, there isn't any way in hell I'd vote for someone in that party. How'd the Democrats get past their segregationist past?

    They lived it down over a period of decades. And that's what the Republicans are going to have to do, too.

  • kinnath||

    Except Jim Crow was imposed by Southern Democrats.

  • Zeb||

    Nearly all of whom later became Republicans.

  • kinnath||

    See below

  • Mick Kraut||

    I am in the same boat as you from an age perspective but that said, wasnt it democrats who so violently resisted civil right legislation? So when it comes to those who did live through it why do they not remember that?

  • sarcasmic||

    If their memories conflict with the narrative, they'll choose the narrative. It's the nature of being a liberal.

  • Ken Shultz||

    The Democrats lived it down.

    If you listen to the speech he gave, the part where the audience starts laughing at Rand, when he talks about how it was the Democrats that were largely responsible for segregation and Jim Crow, etc., they aren't laughing at him for pointing that out, exactly...

    They're laughing at him for pointing that out--to an audience at Howard University! Those people--in that audience--know the history of the Civil Rights struggle in this country better than any other audience anywhere else in the world. They were laughing at him becasue he seemed to be presuming to tell them something about their own history that he didn't think they knew.

    Yeah, they know what the Democrats did during segregation. And for them, the Democrats have lived it down.

  • lap83||

    Yes and for them, the Republicans are all racists.

    They may know about their past, but they know nothing about the opposing viewpoint. Fuck 'em and their elitist ignorance.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "Fuck 'em and their elitist ignorance."

    From a marketing standpoint, that's probably a losing strategy.

    That may be why we have ObamaCare.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    "Fuck 'em and their elitist ignorance."

    "From a marketing standpoint, that's probably a losing strategy."

    You know what's even worse from a marketing standpoint? The truth. So unless you are willing to divest yourself of all dignity and confess to thought-crimes, you are NEVER going to reach college lefty types.

    "That may be why we have ObamaCare."

    That's a really stupid statement. But frankly, I'd rather have Obamacare than kiss their asses.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Rand is taking the correct approach of trying to convince them otherwise. I personally think it is most likely that de Tocqueville was right and the American experiment is on the long slow road to bankruptcy, but the least that can be done is to try to make people understand why.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I don't think his target audience was really black people at Howard University.

    I think he was reaching out to swing voters of all colors (including white) who are reluctant to vote for Republicans because they perceive them as being hostile to minorities.

    All those Gen Y college students are gonna get to vote again in a couple of years--better to get yourself in the photo talking to people of other races now. Why wait for the campaign to start?

    Hell, getting lots of minorities in the shot is how McDonalds sells hamburgers now.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkjOSo5YWMc

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    But I thought McDonald's is just trying to give all of those poor disadvantaged people DIABEETUS.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Possibly, but those commercials aren't just running downtown.

    That's how they sell stuff to people of all races during Superbowl ads.

    If McDonalds wants to sell hamburgers to WHITE kids, they seem to think their best bet is to use black kids in the commercial.

    The GOP should smarten up and do the same. If you want to sell something to average Americans, you better get some minorities in the shot somehow.

    You can add them to the list. It used to be all about puppies, babies, and hot chicks.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Your idea occurred to me, too. He may be targeting whites rather than blacks. "Look, I'm talking to a black crowd about how my party champions black interests. You get to mention this fact in case anyone tries to guilt-trip you for supporting a Republican."

  • Tak Kak||

    Yes, like Reagan's famous billboard of black endorsers. It's will only help win over whites on the margin.

  • Loki||

    Yeah, they know what the Democrats did during segregation. And for them, the Democrats have lived it down.

    ...through promises of MOAR FREE SHIT for the last 50 years. All Rand has to offer them is the promise to leave them alone and let them succeed or fail on their own merits. That's scary to a lot of people.

    Not to mention what the Democrats offer is a "free" lunch today while what Rand is offering is the opportunity to be able to buy their lunch tomorrow if they're willing to work hard for it. A lot of people will choose the "free" lunch today rather than risk failing, even if the "free" lunch is shit and, if successful, you could dine on Filet Minon tomorrow.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think Paul has a good intellectual argument about how big government programs have hurt, rather than helped, the black community.

    But who else in the Republican Party is working on thinking about ways to make things better for the black community?

    There used to be other Republicans that did that back in the day? That used to be one of Jack Kemp's big issues.

    Also, again, from a purely tactical standpoint, there are a lot of swing voters who vote against the Republicans because of their perceived hostility or indifference to the problems of minority communities, whether it be blacks, Latinos, gay people...

    It isn't just the black community's votes that in play, here. I think that woman that wondered why Howard let Rand Paul speak there was probably questioning why Howard University would let itself be used to, basically, exploit the black community at Howard for political purposes.

    I think there's something to the observation in that Rand's target audience for this wasn't black people at Howard University. His main target was probably swing voters who listen to NPR, read news on the internet, or watch cable television.

  • Overt||

    It isn't as simple as that. The problem is that the GOP is trying to combat Unseen Costs while the Democrats are combating Seen Costs.

    Look at minimum wage. Among minorities, there is broad support for increasing minimum wage- even though there is ample evidence that doing so causes unemployment among their own.

    GOP members can yell until red in the face about how minimum wage hikes actually hurt Minorities, but the Democrat will always respond with "Who are you going to believe? This old white guy who gets donations from the same people who pay you a shitty wage, or me and what you see on your paycheck?"

    The Democrats monopolize combatting "Seen Costs". All of their messaging is around making a law to will away some cost that people experience- school, credit cards, housing, stocks, whatever and pushing that cost somewhere unseen. The GOP used to have one seen cost they could combat- Taxes. But the Dems have one-upped them to say "No taxes for you, just for republicans".

  • grey||

    We are living the dystopian future. The money will run out, right?

  • grey||

    Who else in the Repblican Party? I can't honestly see red team pivoting to selling a small government liberty brand. I've been suckered too many times.

  • wareagle||

    Those people--in that audience--know the history of the Civil Rights struggle in this country better than any other audience anywhere else in the world.

    do they really? Because it would appear that they would also know how Repubs by % were more supportive of the CRA than Dems. And it would appear that they would know about the Dem-produced war on poverty and the disaster it has spawned. And it would appear they might recognize how the party they support consistently condescends to them as if they are all stupid little children.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Yeah, they know all about that, too.

    And they think that Republicans today are basically hostile to minorities.

    I'm not saying that's the way it should be. I'm saying that's the way it is.

    I can agree with you that it shouldn't be that way, but I don't see any point in pretending that's not the way it is.

    There are ways to combat that perception, but right now I don't think the Republicans are doing anything at all. There used to be Republicans who did that though:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....99928.html

  • wareagle||

    And they think that Republicans today are basically hostile to minorities.

    of course, that's what they think. That is what the Dems and the media have told them their entire lives. Imagine being on the side of having to prove you are NOT racist; proving a negative is tough sledding.

    Voters tend to be lazy and black voters are not immune from that. When a candidate tells you an entire party hates you and your race, and that candidate's party offers you free shit, but the other side tells you to make it on your own, a lot of people take the gimme road.

  • DarrenM||

    And they think that Republicans today are basically hostile to minorities.

    Many Republicans are. What they won't hear about are the many Democrats that are also hostile to minorities. The only thing that matters to either party is votes. Democrats happen to be better at manipulating the proles. As long as they can paint Republicans as 'hostile to minorities' (and many Republicans help them with this), they don't have to actually do anything.

  • Gorilla tactics||

    why talk about outcomes when the intentions were so pure and good?

  • Mo||

    The CRA vote wasn't broken down by Dems vs. Reps, it was broken down by North vs. South (i.e. old CSA). If you look at it broken down by party and region, the Dems look better. Southern Dems were 5%/7% for (Senate/House), Southern Reps were 0%/0% for. Northern Dems were 98%/94% for and Northern Reps were 84%/85% for. Due to Simpson's Paradox, the Dems look worse.

  • Calidissident||

    There were barely any Southern Republicans back then, not enough of a sample size to really draw any conclusions

  • Mo||

    Agree. Just 1 Senator and 10 Representatives, compared to the Dem's slate of 21 Senators and 94 Representatives. I don't think the party really matters for the Southern states. This merely demonstrates that it was a regional thing. Only one Dem Senator (out of 46) that wasn't from an old CSA state, the execrable Robert Byrd, voted against it.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    "They're laughing at him for pointing that out--to an audience at Howard University! Those people--in that audience--know the history of the Civil Rights struggle in this country better than any other audience anywhere else in the world."

    If they actually knew history they wouldn't have the inane, statist positions they have. So fuck them and their "knowledge."

    This is how smart these culture warriors are: about every fifteen minutes some liberal Dem douche bag gets caught doing something blatantly racist, like dressing up in black face or calling a reporter a crackhead or whatnot. This causes virtually no storm among the academic crowd. Then Rand Paul calls for lowering taxes (decreasing govt. theft) and they all compare him to the Grand Dragon of the KKK.

    I'm not impressed with their knowledge.

  • MasterDarque||

    They laughed at him for saying it - Listen blacks in America get a very fucked up narrative of how the political system worked. If you query most blacks between a Repub and a Demo they will almost always choice the Demo regardless of the issue.

  • ThatSkepticGuy||

    You're giving them far too much credit.

    Between the idiotic sign, the heckling, and the moronic comments from interviewers, it seems painfully obvious to me that this is a largely uninformed crowd who are laughing at Paul because they've been so indoctrinated to believe that Four Legs = Good and Two Legs = Bad, that his bringing up the Democratic Party's racist legacy (which, by the way, still persists in spite of all the "Mass Dixicrat Migration" myths they've concocted) is akin to teling the crowd that he's Santa Claus.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Those Democrats who resisted civil rights legislation later became Republicans under the Southern Strategy, another one of Nixon's gifts that keeps on giving.

  • Gorilla tactics||

    are you sure? The segregationist dems were liberal dems in FDR's coalition werent they?

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Those Democrats who resisted civil rights legislation later became Republicans under the Southern Strategy,

    Bullshit.

    The old 'conservative' southern dems gradually died off, they did join the republican party en masse; the idea that they did is just another progressive lie.

  • Loki||

    And that's what the Republicans are going to have to do, too.

    What segregationist past? The Republicans weren't the ones who past Jim Crow laws to beging with. Unfortunately you'd never know that from most American History textbooks.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think most Republicans have learned to keep their mouths shut on things that might offend the black community specifically, but if had to pin the tail on the major party, whose members are most likely to stand up for the rights of minorities, which one would you pick?

    I think there may be a lot of guilt by association going on. When you see a party's stalwarts attacking gay people's rights or going hard after illegal immigrants, I think there's some spillover for that. Regardless of why they think it, though, that seems to be what they think...

    And whether their conclusions are fair or unfair, the Republicans are gonna have to live it down either way. ...or continue to concede the White House, and I don't think we can take much more of this progressive bullshit in the White House without seriously damaging our society.

  • MasterDarque||

    The black community could stand to be offended right about now

  • CampingInYourPark||

    "How'd the Democrats get past their segregationist past?"

    Affirmative action

  • kinnath||

    Cash, lot's of cash.

  • sarcasmic||

    Those racist Republicans, unlike the tolerant Democrats, do not recognize that blacks are inherently inferior and in need of special treatment.

  • Calidissident||

    Combination of support for Civil Rights legislation by Northern Dems, government programs, affirmative action, and white Southerners becoming Republicans

  • wargames83||

    She probably knows about the Southern Strategy which was started by Barry Goldwater and used successfully by Nixon. Republicans like Rand Paul act like the Southern Strategy never happened when they pretend to puzzled about why African Americans no longer vote for the party that freed the lives and started the NAACP.

  • sarcasmic||

    For many of the people who attended and saw a conflict between the real Rand Paul and the caricature created by the media, they'll believe the caricature over their lying eyes.

    Can't stray from the groupthink or you'll be rejected by the collective.

  • kinnath||

    As I remember it: The Republican's prosecuted the war against the southern states. So after the war, no one could get elected as dog-catcher under the Republican banner. So pretty much all elected officials were Democrats. But the Southern Democrats where predominately white segregationist. When LBJ pushed civil rights, the white segregationists fled to the Republican party.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    The south was largely D even after the CRA debate.

    http://tinyurl.com/ccnpkzy

    Shows a list of prominent political hacks and their affiliations

  • kinnath||

    http://suite101.com/article/th.....on-a269466

    The 'Southern Strategy' is a term used to describe the Republican's method of winning previously unattainable votes of white Americans in the formerly Democrat South, during the early 20th century. The term is attributed (although he really just popularised it) to Kevin Phillips, a former Richard Nixon campaign adviser. Phillips stated to the Republican Party that there was an opportunity to polarise the Southern voting, after seeing the Democrat Party fill with black votes. By standing for the idea of 'state-rights,' without being totally against integration, Phillips hoped to attract anti-black whites to vote Republican.

    During a 1970 New York Times interview, Phillips said: "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".

  • CampingInYourPark||

    http://www.redstate.com/dan_mc.....-majority/

    "At the center of the Southern Strategy myth is the idea that Republicans used the race card to seduce Democratic voters in the South into leaving their natural partisan home. The truth, as Trende convincingly demonstrates, is the opposite: the growth of GOP support among white Southerners was steady and mostly gradual from 1928 to 2010, and was a natural outgrowth of the fact that white Southerners were ideologically much more compatible with the national Republican agenda and coalition than with the national Democratic agenda and coalition. What retarded the Southern switch from the Democrats to the GOP was a combination of party loyalties dating back to Reconstruction and the Democrats’ use of racial issues. In other words, if you take race out of the picture, it’s likely that white Southerners would have switched parties earlier and in greater numbers. The real 'Southern Strategy' was the one pursued by the Democrats, especially under FDR, to keep conservative white Southerners in a liberal party."

  • lap83||

    Thank you for posting that. That book looks interesting.

  • Calidissident||

    The vast majority of the segregationist politicians remained Democrats for life

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I thought the Rand Paul that we saw here was different from the Rand Paul that is portrayed in the media.

    And that is entirely Rand Paul's fault. Because our "fake, but accurate" corporate journalists would never, ever misrepresent anyone for the sake of creating a false narrative and then repeating that narrative ad nauseum.

  • Raston Bot||

    I imagine the sobering unemployment of crony socialism will awaken a few in time.

  • Teaching Student||

    Why? When all they have to do is vote Democrat for more free stuff?

  • ||

    The part I found interesting was the guy who said it wasn't the same RP portrayed in the media and, OF COURSE, it was because Rand was changing to fit the audience. The media would never dream of portraying someone falsely.

  • some guy666||

    I thought libertarians were freethinkers. This whole thread has been nothing but generalizations with sprinkles of sarcastic douchiness. Good try Rand. Go somewhere else for new potential libertarian converts.....and votes.

  • ||

    So you start off your statement with a generalization followed by another generalization, then dive right in to the non sarcastic "douchiness". Seems you have it down.

    FOAD

  • Mick Kraut||

    I would honestly wish that someone could explain to me how Republicans are racists in their view. For the life of me all I see is that their support of the Democrats has literally brought ruin and destruction to them in the form of government programs which have undermined every element of successful black families since the mid 1960s.

    They blame Republicans for being racists when it is the democrats and liberals who are telling them they arent good enough, smart enough or strong enough to do anything without the government holding their hand throughout the process. You cant get into college without quotas, you cant get a job without affirmative action, you cant win government contracts without minority set-asides...In every aspect of their lives they are being told they cant do something because they are black and yet they are against the group telling them that they are good enough and smart enough?

    So who are the racists? Those who view them as adults who can and will succeed or those who have infantilized them and have convinced them to feel nearly helpless without government acting as their guardians? If you painted the picture of today's black community to a klansman in 1965 and explained to him that governement programs could be set up to insidiously destroy the bedrocks of black society and family structure, he couldnt be happier with the results some 48 years later.

  • Ken Shultz||

    If the Republicans are misperceived, then they should definitely do something about that.

  • wareagle||

    Repubs are racists because the students have been told so their entire lives. Repub = racist is an article of faith in the church of liberalism and the Dem Party. You are attempting to use facts and logic to rebut decades of emotion-based inculcation.

  • Gorilla tactics||

    they're coded racists. Everything passes through a filter that is only found in Caucasian eardrums-or as Obama might say: you didn't hear that.

  • MasterDarque||

    Excellent Mick

  • WomSom||

    Those dudes clearly know whats going on over there. Wow.

    www.Net-Privacy.us

  • ChrisO||

    Rand undoubtedly reached *some* people in the audience, and that's the entire point. You don't turn this kind of thing around overnight, and I'm sure Rand understands that.

    The hardcore "free shit" crowd isn't going to give him a fair listen. But obviously not all black folks, not even all Howard University students, are moochers. In fact, to assume so is quite racist and rather stupid.

  • Voros McCracken||

    Am I only one who noticed the date was wrong at the start of the video?

  • John Staszak||

    I think Sen. Paul is going to have a hard time with his position on The Civil Rights Act vis a' vis his belief that private groups and businesses should the right to exclude people based on race or other factors, with the consequences of lost profits and community outrage. His position, "the hard part of freedom" is nuanced and ideologically consistent, but it makes him look pro-discrimination. (at least to people who don't think it through) I agree with him though; both that bigots should be called out, boycotted, and ostracized, and that the government shouldn't be the one to do it.
    As a gay man, I am pleased that people are coming to accept my existence. In fact, most people I meet don't seem to care one way or the other. I am struck, however, by how government has lagged on this issue. By the time Obama mustered the courage to repeal DADT, it was a non-event. I served four years in the Marines in the 90's and anyone who knew me at all had to be aware of my orientation by virtue of the fact that they weren't idiots. I think I was a pretty good Marine, that was the only thing my comrades cared about. Civil rights for blacks is similar: the passage of the Civil Rights Act merely codified what people were coming to see on their own. I don't feel the need for the federal government to mandate to my state the definition of marriage (if I felt I needed to, I'd move) and I certainly don't need the feds to criminally prosecute people who don't want to cater my wedding.

  • grey||

    My mistrust of government began in the military. Gay coworker, great guy, very nice to me. He was in some other gays little black book. NIS took my gay worker, beat the shit out of him, returned him to work. He barely spoke after that. Group think collectivist mother fuckers.

  • Gorilla tactics||

    I think that black guy had a good point.

  • Gorilla tactics||

    I applaud the man-it's not gunna help blacks if libertarians just write them off as a lost cause. It's not gunna be easy but the dems can't fool everyone all the time. We need more wedge issues to peel blacks away from libs, keep hammering on school choice. If we get like 20% the dems are fucked

  • Hyperion||

    We might not reach 20% of blacks for a long time, but we can get more than 20% of young people. In fact, I think we can reach a majority of them, and in just a few years. Ron Paul has already showed us the way.

  • grey||

    Young people are going to need their student loans paid by WE.

  • JeremyR||

    I don't think so. Do you know what most young people think about Ron Paul? That "It's Happening" animated gif, of him waving his arms looking crazy

  • jordanjerry||

    my best friend's sister got paid $18490 past week. she has been working on the computer and moved in a $584400 home. All she did was get fortunate and try the clues shown on this link and go to home tab for more detail--- big76.COM

  • Hyperion||

    Rand and his father Ron should be on every University campus across the country at every opportunity. The only way that we can turn around 100 years of failed progressivism, and get Libertarian ideas out in the mainstream, so that we can get the bad stuff repealed and get moving in the right direction for liberty, is through the young people. And we've already seen how popular Ron Paul is with these young people. If that isn't a clue, then I don't know what it takes.

  • grey||

    You're right, but this last election makes me wonder if ideas have any chance against the free shit chant.

  • ||

    So all the bad Dems joined the GOP, which now is Racist? Really. Are we talking about Legislators, or voters? Which specific GOP sponsored legislation was racist?
    As for Legislators, Strom Thurmond-did he change parties. Maybe not. Robert Byrd supposedly lived down his past association with the KKK, even though he made racist comments his whole career as a Dem. Yet he gets a pass, while folks won't vote Republican because DUH, racist.
    What a bunch of bull.
    Small government either benefits everyone or no one, race has nothing to do with it.

  • Calidissident||

    Well, most Republicans don't actually support small government

  • sam the man||

    Republican politicians don't. Their base is a lot more supportive.

  • grey||

    I'd say this is true, I was constantly disappointed red teamer. Republican Politician would say, Small Government, but then not do the opposite. I'm very wary of supporting Republicans. Frankly I don't know how or why I would now.

  • Houkt Un Fanixs||

    Real Chocolate Faces! No Make up!

  • ||

    I did not like Rand's answer to the student who said he needed help from the government. Ok, everyone needs help. Me too. But why should he assume he has to get it from the Gov? Scholarship maybe? Any help the government gives him, it takes away from someone else. And that someone else has a sob story too. So why should the government pick their favorite victims to benefit at the expense of those who are not favored?

  • John C. Randolph||

    Regrettably, Rand missed the opportunity to point out that it's government that makes college so expensive. My dad's generation were able to put themselves through college working summer jobs. My dad put himself through school working as an orderly in a hospital. My uncle was a steelworker and got his degree studying at night.

    -jcr

  • Marcus75||

    before I saw the check four $8840, I have faith ...that...my neighbours mother woz like they say realy taking home money parttime on their apple laptop.. there dads buddy started doing this for only about sixteen months and resantly paid the debts on their mini mansion and purchased a new Ford Focus. we looked here, http://www.wow92.com

  • Flatulent Monkey||

    A Ford Focus!!!! No way!!!1!!!! Next you are gonna tell me that they bought a Dodge Neon!

    Oh and can you ask your neighbor's mother if I can borrow 100 bucks?

  • buybuydandavis||

    Loved the thug who was "embarrassed, shocked, and offended that he was allowed to speak at Howard University".

    "Allowed to speak" - that's all you need to know about such a cretin.

  • Lord Peter Wimsey||

    '"Allowed to speak" - that's all you need to know about such a cretin.'

    And realize: most of the idiots in that audience feel that way. A window into the kind of country they'd create if allowed to do so.

  • Acheron||

    I keep hearing 'the black vote' is actually in line with Republicans when it comes to social issues like gay marriage, but solidly with the democrats on everything else, anti-free market, want more gun control, etc.

    If that's accurate, libertarians have a long way to go to capture this voting bloc.

  • ||

    After the disheartening results in November, I told my wife (who could care less truth be told), the libertarian message has to get out. The leaders have to hit the schools. Hammer the message home. Slap the Bill Maher's of this world back into place. It's a daunting task, obviously given the Glover's and Tony's of this world, but it can be done. Ideas do shift, change and eventually captivate. I do my little part by supporting Reason, leaving comments etc. I also invite Reason readers to support Canadian libertarian publications like Le Quebecois Libre.

    Keep the train moving.

  • grey||

    +1

    We have not stay out of the trap of fighting the Republican arguments and make our own. Same with candidates.

  • joeedick||

    Jace. I can see what your saying... Travis`s rep0rt is incredible, on saturday I bought themselves a Lotus Carlton since getting a check for $9970 this past 5 weeks and-over, 10 grand last-munth. it's realy the most financially rewarding I have ever done. I began this 10-months ago and almost straight away started to make minimum $80.. per-hr. I use the details on this web-site,,-- Gig60.ℂOM

  • XM||

    African Americans are as far away from libertarians as you can get - socially conservative, fiscally liberal (although the younger generation are more modern progressive).

    The black population is either declining or growing at a slower pace compared to other racial groups. Latinos and Asians have no affinity to them whatsoever. I say the real hatred towards blacks actually comes from non white folks.

    It makes more sense for Rand to peel away more WHITE votes, which still make up the majority of voters. If Obamacare bombs, Clinto will still pocket 70% of minority votes EASY. You need middle class white votes in 3,4 key states to make a difference.

  • XM||

    clinton

  • Conrad97||

    If you think Lois`s story is super..., 1 weak-ago my brother in law basically also recieved a check for $7310 workin fifteen hours a week from there house and their buddy's mother`s neighbour has done this for three months and made more than $7310 part-time on there labtop. apply the tips on this link... http://www.wow92.com

  • J_West||

    I would honestly wish that someone could explain to me how Republicans are racists in their view.

    Let me explain. "Racist" is a meaningless word. It is a label which is stuck on political opponents to demonize them and shut down the dialog. The left uses the word "racist" to mean "anyone who opposes our agenda" and "anyone who promotes the rights of white people with the same vigor as we promote the interests of non-whites."

    The dilemma is in the assumption of too many libertarians and conservatives who think that words mean what they are supposed to mean. It may come as a shock, but the left and its supporters have no more interest in a free market of ideas than they do in a free market economy. Anything which does not support the growth of big government and in support of their client interests is "racism."

    They see "racism" not in terms of equality of opportunity, but in equality of outcome. If a minority group is 13% of the population, then it should have 13% of the college admissions slots, 13% of the government contracts, etc., regardless of individual merits. Also, if anything more than 13% are in jail, then the system is "racist," regardless of the percentage of crimes being committed by that 13%.

    It's irrational, but who says politics are rational?

  • J_West||

    I think Paul has a good intellectual argument about how big government programs have hurt, rather than helped, the black community.

    Which is the problem. You do not create a mass movement via intellectual arguments. The Democrats use a combination of emotion and base self-interest. Their supporters do not want "liberty" or "equality." They want the government to intervene to get them into college and then give them that upwardly mobile job. Overt sums it up nicely with the point about Seen versus Unseen costs.

    Much of it goes back to the politics. Blacks have become so invested in big government that to cut back the power of the state would also undermine black's perception of their rights. For example, would you get rid of the various Equal Opportunities and Civil Rights Commissions? That's big government in action. What about ending all government minorities-only contracts? More big government. What about affirmative action and "diversity" requirements? More big government intervention in the market. Or the recent state takeover of Detroit? Again, more big government.

    Like it or not, one result of the civil rights revolution was the creation of a massive state bureaucracy and an ideology which promotes a centralized state, redistribution of wealth, and endless regulation.

    How's that working out?

  • helenarther||

    Christian. I just agree... Joanne`s rep0rt is surprising, yesterday I got Ford Focus after making $9665 this past 5 weeks and-also, 10k last munth. this is definitely the most financially rewarding I have ever had. I actually started 7-months ago and right away startad bringin home minimum $71, p/h. I use this here great link,,
    http://big76.com

  • Joi Gallenstein||

    Reason TV's Nick Gillespie and Meredith Bragg talked with students and attendees to see what they thought of Paul's talk and his libertarian positions on military intervention, the drug war, sentencing reform, government regulation, and school choice.http://www.vendreceintures.com/

  • film izle||

    Very good and interesting site with very good look and perfect information ... I like it.

Click here to follow Reason on Instagram

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE