Can a Dem Black President be elected with GOP signing Civil Rights?

Black Dem POTUS, GOP signing Civil Rights. Possible?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Hard

  • Somewhat


Results are only viewable after voting.
Is the above scenario possible?

This is when the Democrats don't turn neo-Dixie, e.g. Humphrey leading the Democratic Party, after Republicans signing Civil Rights in the scenario. Is this possible?
 
We've had Herman Cain, Ben Carson, and Condolezza Rice in OTL,all of whom could have plausibly won the Republican nomination despite the Democrats getting civil rights past. So I'd think its equally possible that we could have black Democratic POTUS if they hadnt done that.
 
Last edited:
It really depends on the POD. If it's Dewey beating Truman and the 1952 Dem candidate being a segregationist sympathizer and not Stevenson, then it could make the GOP the party of civil rights while not having a stranglehold on the black vote due to the Democrats being perceived as having better economic and urban policies.

This might be one of the better PODs to get a semi-enduring American Independent Party organ since there won't be a cynical Republican maneuver to the Southern Strategy. They'd sort of end up playing the role of either the Liberal Democrats (in their more prominent years) and what is now with the Scottish National Party in terms of persisting despite an FPP voting regime.
 
Is the above scenario possible?

This is when the Democrats don't turn neo-Dixie, e.g. Humphrey leading the Democratic Party, after Republicans signing Civil Rights in the scenario. Is this possible?
Signing Civil Rights doesn't mean you automatically win the African-American vote.

Let say that Nixon manages to get a Civil Rights Act through, but it's purely about voting and the ballot, with no protections for employees being fired because they're black or segregated places.

Then Humphrey comes in and passes a Civil Rights Act through that actually bans that while strengthening voter protections and has everything in the 1968 Act.

Black_Vote_Pres.jpg

African-Americans, already pretty strong lean Democrats thanks to FDR's New Deal, would find Humphrey's Civil Rights Act superior to Nixon's, and continue voting Democratic.

For your wondering if it's likely that there would be an African-American candidate that wins as a Democrat, it really depends on the candidate in question.
 
Of course it's possible, especially since you don't say *when* the African American Democratic president is elected. If, say, a President Nixon had signed a civil rights bill in 1964, the black vote would not be as overwhelmingly Democratic as it became in OTL, but it would still be mostly Democratic, as it had been since the New Deal, decades before Goldwater voted against the civil rights bill. (And who knows--a *subsequent* GOP president might make the Republicans as unpopular with blacks as they were in OTL?) In any event, if the black vote is less overwhelmingly committed to one party than in OTL, and if whites gradually become more open to voting for black candidates, that is actually all the more incentive for *either* party to nominate a black presidential candidate.
 
Of course it's possible, especially since you don't say *when* the African American Democratic president is elected. If, say, a President Nixon had signed a civil rights bill in 1964, the black vote would not be as overwhelmingly Democratic as it became in OTL, but it would still be mostly Democratic, as it had been since the New Deal, decades before Goldwater voted against the civil rights bill. (And who knows--a *subsequent* GOP president might make the Republicans as unpopular with blacks as they were in OTL?) In any event, if the black vote is less overwhelmingly committed to one party than in OTL, and if whites gradually become more open to voting for black candidates, that is actually all the more incentive for *either* party to nominate a black presidential candidate.

Or what is perhaps more possible: an earlier and somewhat different civil rights campaign, focusing on voting rights and lynching, but not challenging segregation (with all its emotional baggage). Let's say that this starts with the election of Dewey in 1948 over President James Byrnes. While many black leaders are dissatisfied with the limited scope of Dewey's civil rights legislation, it does have the effect of undermining the political hold of the white supremacists. By 1960, under Dewey and his successor, Earl Warren, the white supremacy regime has collapsed politically, and desegregation of government services is underway.

Black votes are divided about 50/50. In 1960, Warren is narrowly defeated by Humphrey, running with Fulbright against the Middle East "police action" and the recession of 1959-60. Humphrey pushes through new, more drastic civil rights laws, and is assassinated by a disgruntled white supremacist. Fulbright refuses to enforce the new laws, outraging liberal Democrats.

In 1964, Pennsylvania Governor Scranton is elected President over John Kennedy, after Kennedy's lurid personal life is exposed. Kennedy's last minute attempt to salvage his campaign by running far left backfires. He is the first Democrat to lose every Southern state. Scranton quietly resumes limited enforcement of the Humphrey Acts. By his second term (1968-1972), resistance dwindles away, as Southerners no longer want the backwards image.

From then on, black votes remain fairly evenly divided. By 1996, race is not a political issue at all. In that year, Illinois Governor Jesse White (D) was elected President.
 
Of course it's possible, especially since you don't say *when* the African American Democratic president is elected. If, say, a President Nixon had signed a civil rights bill in 1964, the black vote would not be as overwhelmingly Democratic as it became in OTL, but it would still be mostly Democratic, as it had been since the New Deal, decades before Goldwater voted against the civil rights bill. (And who knows--a *subsequent* GOP president might make the Republicans as unpopular with blacks as they were in OTL?) In any event, if the black vote is less overwhelmingly committed to one party than in OTL, and if whites gradually become more open to voting for black candidates, that is actually all the more incentive for *either* party to nominate a black presidential candidate.

Would you if you define the ITTL Civil Rights Act of 1964? Does it have the strength of the OTL Act?
 
Would you if you define the ITTL Civil Rights Act of 1964? Does it have the strength of the OTL Act?

It might, but even if it's a bit weaker, it would still be enough to hold the "normal" pre-Goldwater support for the GOP among blacks. Which means maybe 30 percent rather than single digits.
 
Or what is perhaps more possible: an earlier and somewhat different civil rights campaign, focusing on voting rights and lynching, but not challenging segregation (with all its emotional baggage). Let's say that this starts with the election of Dewey in 1948 over President James Byrnes. While many black leaders are dissatisfied with the limited scope of Dewey's civil rights legislation, it does have the effect of undermining the political hold of the white supremacists. By 1960, under Dewey and his successor, Earl Warren, the white supremacy regime has collapsed politically, and desegregation of government services is underway.

Black votes are divided about 50/50. In 1960, Warren is narrowly defeated by Humphrey, running with Fulbright against the Middle East "police action" and the recession of 1959-60. Humphrey pushes through new, more drastic civil rights laws, and is assassinated by a disgruntled white supremacist. Fulbright refuses to enforce the new laws, outraging liberal Democrats.

In 1964, Pennsylvania Governor Scranton is elected President over John Kennedy, after Kennedy's lurid personal life is exposed. Kennedy's last minute attempt to salvage his campaign by running far left backfires. He is the first Democrat to lose every Southern state. Scranton quietly resumes limited enforcement of the Humphrey Acts. By his second term (1968-1972), resistance dwindles away, as Southerners no longer want the backwards image.

From then on, black votes remain fairly evenly divided. By 1996, race is not a political issue at all. In that year, Illinois Governor Jesse White (D) was elected President.
Omg yes, Jesse White deserves his recognition.
 
Top