In five pages this paper considers an article in a magazine that discussed the supposed flip flop of the Democrat and Republican parties with the criticism that the author's arguments and rush to judgment are not factually based. One source is cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: CC6_KSamTribes.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
well enough, but his driving instruction program apparently never was completed. He drives off the pavement right into the weeds in "Americas Tribes." Fortunately, he avoids the trees
in his path, but he takes a wrong turn nevertheless. Linds thesis statement is: "In the past 40 years, the Democratic and
Republican parties in the US have almost entirely switched places. But a longer-lasting contest underlies this strange history ... a struggle between two tribal coalitions, the socially-minded Puritans of
the north and the colonial gentlemen of the south" (Lind). Linds Veracity The opening statement
of the article is true enough, but Lind fails to see reasons for the shift. In 1960, John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, was seen as being one of the
most highly liberal presidential candidates that the US had known. Of course there were examples of other presidents more liberal than JFK, most notably Franklin Roosevelt who instituted all
manner of social programs and economy stimulus programs during the decade of the Great Depression. Later examination of JFKs campaign promises and study of his stance on Cuba and
the Bay of Pigs incident reveals his position on issues and his actions in reality to be far more closely aligned with the Republican view of today.
Linds observation that todays Republicans are more like the Democrats of the Kennedy era is correct. To say that the two parties have changed places
over the past four decades is to completely miss the mark of the parties focuses in todays environment, however. Though todays Republicans are much like yesterdays Democrats in ideology,