White supremacists are redundant. Everyone knows whites are the supreme race, and nobody likes a bragger :)

Are you kidding?  I already posted facts.  Data.  Where is your data?  This statement proves that you are incapable of being objection.  It is a fact that Republicans supported Civil Rights far greater than Democrats did.

Again:

Since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 % of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 % of the votes.

Also about the South:

Democratic incumbents still held sway over voters in many states, especially those of the Deep South. In fact, until 2002, Democrats still had much control over Southern politics. It wasn't until the 1990s that Democratic control gradually collapsed, starting with the elections of 1994, in which Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress, through the rest of the decade. 

A huge portion of Representatives, Senators, and voters who were referred to as Reagan Democrats in the 1980s were conservative Southern Democrats. An interesting exception to this trend is Arkansas, where to this day all but one statewide elected officials are Democrats. (The state has, however, given its electoral votes to the GOP in the past three Presidential elections, although in 1992 and 1996, "favorite son" Bill Clinton was the candidate and won each time.)

Ummmmm.....are you reading my posts. The problem is, its not Democrats.....its the South. I guarantee you that those number would be very different if you looked at civil rights votes while controlling for the South. There's a reason why people, when running regressions for this time period, usually include controls for the South.....because its a huge casual factor.

For example, 94% of Northern Democrats voted for the Civil Rights act while 7% of Southern Democrats voted for it........for Republicans, the numbers are 85%(Northern) and 0% (Southern)......I think you get my point. The South is a much more important causal factor than party ID when looking at the behavior of legislators during this time period. As I mentioned before, it just so happens that there are many more Democrats than Republicans in the South during this time period.

Another problem is that including data since 1932 is problematic considering that civil rights wasn't a big issue during this time.......you know......the Great Depression followed by World War II. Its really in the late 1940s/1950s when you see the civil rights movement pick up, and you see civil rights really become a salient issue.

As far as data, I can cite you multiple sources and books if you want. The final part of your post......pretty much confirms exactly what I said. The party realignment of House members in the South lagged significantly behind the presidential realignment.

Since you didn't respond to my previous post, where I challenged the 2/3 against and 2/3 for claim that you made, I'm going to challenge you again, here.

Prove it with actual, verifiable figures. It should all be publicly available. Otherwise, I'm just going to assume you got the claim from Breitbart's blog, and I have no reason to trust Breitbart's claims at all.

26 "major" civil rights votes is a challenge, though, so I'll be kind to you - find three such votes where Democrats opposed but Republicans supported, where Democrats weren't opposing because it wasn't strong enough. Given the percentages provided in your claim, 76% of such legislation (that's 19 or 20 out of 26) should satisfy this requirement, so it shouldn't be hard to find them.

Until you can back up your claim, I'm inclined to assume that it's just false propaganda on the part of certain conservative talking heads.

I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers are close to that given the southern contingent in Democratic party......I am kind of interested in what these major civil rights votes are.....especially considering the civil rights movement can be conceptualized kind of broadly to include women's rights as well......and there's also the problem of what "major" really means. Because of the committee system in Congress, which was largely controlled by senior Democratic members, some of which were southern racists, the bills that even made it out of committee were incredibly watered down and had little significant effect. This is why the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is seen as being such a landmark acheivement.

Really I can think of quite a few that likely fit the bill, but such info is likely buried in specific books.

Anti-lynching laws come to mind for example, that was a big issue for Roosevelt.

The 1875 Civil Rights  act is another... it was so unpopular it got the Republicans kicked out of Office.

I've read before that the 14th and 15th ammendments didn't have a single democratic vote for them.  Though Wikipedia doesn't mention voting by party at all... and in general, google turns up nothing... except claims that no democrat voted for it.

It's funny.  Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights bill that was largely needed because he lead the way in weakening the 1957 bill.

Yeah, it is kind of difficult to find sources on this stuff. He did mention since 1933, so the 14th/15th amendment and 1875 Civil Rights Act wouldn't be included. I wouldn't be surprised if no Democrats voted for them back then.....it was a very different electoral climate.

Was an anti-lynching ever passed or did it even come to the floor in Congress? Just a quick glance at stuff, and it seems these efforts were even stalled/watered down in the committee system or filibustered in the Senate. I really thinks its important to emphasize how difficult it was to get anything done on civil rights during this time-period. You had a bunch of southern Democrats with seniority sitting on these committees or filibustering the legislation. This made it incredibly difficult to get anything done. Most presidents, even FDR, backed down on these issues to preserve political capital for other efforts, such as the New Deal program.