Talk:New Deal coalition

List

I took the liberty of adding a list of the most important programs.--Akako|☎ 15:38, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that the list necessarily fits with the article's topic, though I'll have to consider the issue further. Ingoolemo ^talk 04:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree it does not fit--and furthermore it is already covered under New Deal. This article is about voters not government programs. Rjensen 05:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

As this article stands now, there is more about the "end of the New Deal coalition" than there is about its period of dominance. Shouldn't this be addressed? Rlquall 02:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Confusing Terminology

"Taxpayers, small business and the middle class" is confusing. "Taxpayers" is vague. Small business is not well defined for this time period. The middle class is also ill defined, usually associated with the post-WW2 era, and not the Great Depression. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.38.0.113 (talk) 20:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the above - if the original editor could perhaps elaborate on the reasons for these terms, as presumably taxpayers means everyone who pays their taxes, as opposed to some group of swing voters who were iffy about the New deal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.94.204.106 (talk) 07:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Catholics a racial minority?

To the Author of this article:

You use the term racial minorities in relation to Catholics and Jews. This is obviously incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.162.180.168 (talk) 00:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

the text says ethnic and racial minorities (especially Catholics, Jews and African Americans,). The Catholics and Jews were ethnic minorities. Rjensen (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

High school and grade school

Is it just me, or does this article's table imply that high schoolers and grade schoolers vote(d)? I think there should be an external link for this gallup poll and maybe some revisions made to clear up this confusion. Thanks --DerRichter (talk) 10:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

most polls then and now group people by their highest level of schooling. Anyone who has read a poll report from 2008 will understand that. People who have never read a poll before will be unlikely to start here. Rjensen (talk) 18:27, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I have clarified this. Thanks. --DerRichter (talk) 10:24, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

State of this article

The state of this article is pretty poor. For example, the "Administrations" section cites no sources at all and makes some pretty bold claims about political patronage driving votes. It previously cited "Jensen 1981" as the sole source but its impossible to know what that cite is even referring to. Other sections are very light on sources and make pretty controversial claims.

Moreover, the article takes a pretty partial view on certain subjects which, without sourcing, really isn't appropriate. Examples include:

• "many assimilated descendants of immigrants, disliked the goal of racial integration and became fearful of rising urban crime"
• " a growing number of Americans became unaffiliated with unions; this, combined with generally rising incomes reduced their incentive to vote Democrat. Labor unions were subsequently painted as corrupt, ineffective, and outdated by the Republican Party."
• " urban Democrat politicians would later gain a reputation as sleazy and corrupt."

In short, this article needs a lot of work. I wanted to start a discussion on the talk page first. But absent someone else jumping in, I may try to do some clean-up on this article in the coming days. DocFreeman24 (talk) 00:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@DocFreeman24: Some of the content that I've summarized from Sean Trende's The Lost Majority (2012) in the Political history since 1964 section of the Appalachia article may be of use in this article. I was already re-reading the book to expand the Legacy section. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 02:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh thank you! This has gotten lost on my to-do list for now but I'll keep this in mind if/when I come back to it! DocFreeman24 (talk) 03:13, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

good critique--I have tried to fix those problems and added new material as well, esp regarding city machines and labor unions. That dangling mystery cite to "Jensen 1981" refers to my article: Richard Jensen, "The Last Party System: Decay of Consensus, 1932-1980." in The Evolution of American Electoral Systems (1981): 203-242. Rjensen (talk) 09:44, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Some observations. :

• • The fears for rising crime rates are linked to the law and order rhetoric, which was apparently used by both Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew in the late 1960s and the early 1970s. That both men were criminals is unsurprising, but fearmongering is a standard practice for demagogues.
  • The unions were not just perceived to be corrupt, some of them were corrupt. The article on the International Brotherhood of Teamsters covers their connections to organized crime, as does the article on the International Longshoremen's Association. Several of the relevant press reports date to the 1950s.
  • Why does the mention of "urban Democrat politicians" remind me of Tammany Hall and its influence in New York City? The organization was active until the 1960s. Dimadick (talk) 05:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Rayburn

Shouldn’t Sam Rayburn be added in the list of significant figures at the beginning of the article? He was incredibly influential in getting New Deal legislation through the house during his speakerships. 2601:87:4000:E950:E05E:194C:2BC7:D187 (talk) 22:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: The Rhetoric of Archival Exploration

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 September 2024 and 6 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Spartanbacon (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Spartanbacon (talk) 11:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)