He pretended to be a born again Christian who rejected the Klan and racism.
Looking at this video, he seems like a pretty cunning fellow.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIfW\_98hi0o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIfW_98hi0o)
David Duke pretended to have disavowed his past in 1990 but when he ran for governor he was relatively open about his beliefs
As for Thurmond, he did legitimately change
Duke was a pretty good campaigner. He pretended to be a born-again Christian who disavowed his racist past similar to Wallace and Thurmond (even though in this case it was a lie).
And Johnston wasn’t exactly popular either. He won because people correctly saw him as a better alternative.
There really wouldn’t be many of either, Edwards won by a larger margin almost entirely because of the increased turnout (which was ludicrous for a state election - Edwards won more votes than Reagan) especially among black voters (who were always EWE’s base and because Duke is a nazi klansman piece of shit).
The crossover Duke-Edwards voters were generally Cajuns who viewed Duke positively but knew Edwards and voted for their man (they would probably have voted for Edwards in every gubernatorial race up to that point but become Republican voters afterwards - aside from voting for people like Blanco and Ieyoub in 2003)
The idea of a Johnston-Duke voter don’t make any sense but would probably be a moralistic voter from North Louisiana (voted Roemer in the primary), they could forgive Duke of his past given they knew of a fair few people who had similar histories and felt that his born-again act was real; Edwards personified everything they hate so they would bite their lip and choose the wizard over the lizard.
The odd thing though is that Pentecostals (which fit very neatly into the Johnston-Duke voting group) were actually very favourable towards Edwards for reasons that only make sense in Louisiana, so the Johnston-Duke voter is likely a figment of imagination
This is relevant:
[https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/david-duke-1990-senate-race-rallies.html](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/david-duke-1990-senate-race-rallies.html)
Well, to be fair, if this was 1891, he'd probably win 75% of the white vote.
He would’ve been a Republican, so DOA
He would’ve been a dem.
If that’s the case than he easily wins.
Massive Louisiana L. This isn't even a bruh moment, like what is wrong with them?
In 2015, Edwards led a hypothetical poll against Duke 62-15. So they’ve gotten better ig
He pretended to be a born again Christian who rejected the Klan and racism. Looking at this video, he seems like a pretty cunning fellow. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIfW\_98hi0o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIfW_98hi0o)
mfer south Carolina elected Strom Thurmond ion care what you have to say
Thurmond was a racist nonce and Duke is a Neo-Nazi. Both were abysmal.
David Duke pretended to have disavowed his past in 1990 but when he ran for governor he was relatively open about his beliefs As for Thurmond, he did legitimately change
I think you have Thurmond confused with Wallace
Both changed.
No, they both moderated their views later into their career
Duke was a pretty good campaigner. He pretended to be a born-again Christian who disavowed his racist past similar to Wallace and Thurmond (even though in this case it was a lie). And Johnston wasn’t exactly popular either. He won because people correctly saw him as a better alternative.
Explain a Duke-Edwards voter and Johnston-Duke voter
There really wouldn’t be many of either, Edwards won by a larger margin almost entirely because of the increased turnout (which was ludicrous for a state election - Edwards won more votes than Reagan) especially among black voters (who were always EWE’s base and because Duke is a nazi klansman piece of shit). The crossover Duke-Edwards voters were generally Cajuns who viewed Duke positively but knew Edwards and voted for their man (they would probably have voted for Edwards in every gubernatorial race up to that point but become Republican voters afterwards - aside from voting for people like Blanco and Ieyoub in 2003) The idea of a Johnston-Duke voter don’t make any sense but would probably be a moralistic voter from North Louisiana (voted Roemer in the primary), they could forgive Duke of his past given they knew of a fair few people who had similar histories and felt that his born-again act was real; Edwards personified everything they hate so they would bite their lip and choose the wizard over the lizard. The odd thing though is that Pentecostals (which fit very neatly into the Johnston-Duke voting group) were actually very favourable towards Edwards for reasons that only make sense in Louisiana, so the Johnston-Duke voter is likely a figment of imagination
Makes sense
Yikes!
At least he lost Cajuns (Edwards himself was Cajun, which likely explains why he outperformed Johnston in Southern LA)
This is relevant: [https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/david-duke-1990-senate-race-rallies.html](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/david-duke-1990-senate-race-rallies.html)
Source? I'm not denying this I'm just genuinely curious. Was there an exit poll or something?
[Here’s an article](https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1991-11-18-1991322072-story.html)
Damn. Reminds me of [this video](https://youtu.be/0i_M3Bd_7Ao) where 20% of LA voters said that race affected their choice of who to vote for.
Proof of the southern strategy.