5 ms·

> In District of Columbia County, DC 92.1% of the people voted Democrat Washington DC is overwhelmingly a Democrat bastion, so, regardless of the political app

> In District of Columbia County, DC 92.1% of the people voted Democrat Washington DC is overwhelmingly a Democrat bastion, so, regardless of the political appointee SESers, the rank and file that live around DC are likely to have a specific political leaning. Feel free to fact check this. https://bestneighborhood.org/conservative-vs-liberal-map-washington-dc/ https://bestneighborhood.org/conservative-vs-liberal-map-was...

acdha 4y ago
Now do the Virginia suburbs where a large fraction of them actually live — or, since the DC field office is about 5% of their total staff, the other 55 field offices. DC’s residents skew Democratic for a reason: having such a large black population means that they don’t trust the party which has such a questionable racial history, and that’s important to understand because the FBI’s history means the same people who don’t vote for Republicans are not jumping to join an organization with its history.
- willcipriano 4y ago
  > DC’s residents skew Democratic for a reason: having such a large black population means that they don’t trust the party which has such a questionable racial history Hmmm.
  - acdha 4y ago
    Continue that thought? I have a hunch that you’re about to repeat the usual conservative “the Democrats were the party of slavery” claim which assumes the reader is unaware of the Southern Strategy half a century ago[1], but I’d love to be wrong in that pessimism. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
    - willcipriano 4y ago
      Ahh yes, the southern strategy also know as "to win elections in the south we should do what the Democrats are doing" Go ahead and tell me when the parties "switched": https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_senators_who_switched_partiesq https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_senato...
      - acdha 4y ago
        I would suggest reading the link I gave you previously, which covers the evolution in detail.
        willcipriano 4y ago
        No it doesn't.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > DC’s residents skew Democratic for a reason: having such a large black population means that they don’t trust the party which has such a questionable racial history This seems odd if you think about it in terms of long term party history, because from the founding through the New Deal the Democrats were first and foremost the party of the white Southerners bent on the most extreme de jure racial discrimination (slavery, and then Jim Crow, etc.), and from the New Deal through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 things were more complicated, but they still had that same base as a key constituency; that didn’t really change until Johnson embraced the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Republicans followed up the way that had not done with previous times Democratic leadership had alienated that part of the base by actively courting them, especially starting in the 1968 Presidential election. But you have to realize when discussing D.C. political parties, the District didn’t get to vote for President at all until 1964, didn’t get to vote for a (nonvoting) delegate to Congress (after 1874) until 1970, and didn’t get to vote for its local government until 1974. The history of electoral politics for D.C. residents is much shorter than for most of the rest of the country, and consists almost entirely of the period since the Republicans started actively courting racists as a key constituency.
  - acdha 4y ago
    Yes - and these were self-reinforcing since you had huge shifts following the 1968 riots which caused a lot of people to move to the suburbs, removing them from the DC electorate. Combined with the way the District tends to get more pointless meddling & fiscal sabotage when Republicans control the House and that spread isn’t likely to change anytime soon.

acdha 4y ago

Now do the Virginia suburbs where a large fraction of them actually live — or, since the DC field office is about 5% of their total staff, the other 55 field offices. DC’s residents skew Democratic for a reason: having such a large black population means that they don’t trust the party which has such a questionable racial history, and that’s important to understand because the FBI’s history means the same people who don’t vote for Republicans are not jumping to join an organization with its history.

willcipriano 4y ago
> DC’s residents skew Democratic for a reason: having such a large black population means that they don’t trust the party which has such a questionable racial history Hmmm.
- acdha 4y ago
  Continue that thought? I have a hunch that you’re about to repeat the usual conservative “the Democrats were the party of slavery” claim which assumes the reader is unaware of the Southern Strategy half a century ago[1], but I’d love to be wrong in that pessimism. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
  - willcipriano 4y ago
    Ahh yes, the southern strategy also know as "to win elections in the south we should do what the Democrats are doing" Go ahead and tell me when the parties "switched": https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_senators_who_switched_partiesq https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_senato...
    - acdha 4y ago
      I would suggest reading the link I gave you previously, which covers the evolution in detail.
      - willcipriano 4y ago
        No it doesn't.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> DC’s residents skew Democratic for a reason: having such a large black population means that they don’t trust the party which has such a questionable racial history This seems odd if you think about it in terms of long term party history, because from the founding through the New Deal the Democrats were first and foremost the party of the white Southerners bent on the most extreme de jure racial discrimination (slavery, and then Jim Crow, etc.), and from the New Deal through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 things were more complicated, but they still had that same base as a key constituency; that didn’t really change until Johnson embraced the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Republicans followed up the way that had not done with previous times Democratic leadership had alienated that part of the base by actively courting them, especially starting in the 1968 Presidential election. But you have to realize when discussing D.C. political parties, the District didn’t get to vote for President at all until 1964, didn’t get to vote for a (nonvoting) delegate to Congress (after 1874) until 1970, and didn’t get to vote for its local government until 1974. The history of electoral politics for D.C. residents is much shorter than for most of the rest of the country, and consists almost entirely of the period since the Republicans started actively courting racists as a key constituency.
- acdha 4y ago
  Yes - and these were self-reinforcing since you had huge shifts following the 1968 riots which caused a lot of people to move to the suburbs, removing them from the DC electorate. Combined with the way the District tends to get more pointless meddling & fiscal sabotage when Republicans control the House and that spread isn’t likely to change anytime soon.