George Wallace could probably get elected as Governor of Alabama. Not sure if people like **Shodan **consider him an “open racist.”
A retired print shop employee sends an amused nod your way.
He lost his seniority and is getting primaried, though.
And that’s sort of the line between “openly” and “blatantly”. Trump is blatant (what else would you call the “send them back”?) but when pressed will lie about it. And that lie, that deniability? That matters to a lot of people. They need an excuse? That gives it to them. “We’re not really racists, we just think that these specific brown people should be sent back where they came from”. Most Republicans are extremely racist. But, like most “polite” racists, they care deeply that they aren’t thought of as “racist”.
Steve King has been blatantly racist for quite some time, and anyone that cared to look could find the neo-nazi connections. Most didn’t care to look - they looked for excuses instead. But then he opened his mouth too wide and went from “blatant” to “open”, and now he’s lost his party’s support, lest he reveal just how thin that line is on some of the others.
Open white supremacists can only get so far on negative partisanship and the votes of those willing to be openly racist. Blatant white supremacists differ solely in offering those who desperately want any excuse an excuse. Motivated reasoning is one hell of a drug, and it’s hard to get more motivated than “my politics haven’t really been aligned with the KKK, right?”
Obviously, he could be elected President since it happened in 2016.
It’s hard to be open when you’re dead. And
Cite. And after he said that, he did get re-elected as Governor.
So no, not really an open racist.
Regards,
Shodan
George Wallace is, of course, best known historically for this quote:
“I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”
Other “greatest hits” include things like “If I don’t win, the n****rs are going to control this state” and “This Could Be Alabama Four Years From Now! Do You Want It?” (Referring to a picture of a white woman being menaced by black men.)
He literally ran on a segregationist platform the first time he won a gubernatorial election in Alabama. Indeed, he adopted the policy opportunistically, after his previous strategy of “not be a huge racist shitbag” failed. It’s pretty hard to get more “openly racist” than that - the dude adopted new racist policies to show the racist voters that he was, in fact, that racist.
Shodan, I don’t know how you define “racist”, but whatever your definition is, you’re clearly talking about something entriely different from what everyone else is talking about. Maybe it’d be a good idea if you gave this subject a pass. 
…More on-topic, this is fundamentally the shift we see today. People back then were racist… and they wanted to put the black man in his place. People today are still racist, but they hate being called racist. Today, Wallace would never say anything like that. Instead, he’d be talking about welfare queens. And conservative racists would buy it, because they’re not really interested in hearing about how racist their candidate is, and if he can give them any benefit of the doubt whatsoever, they’ll take it.
You kind of missed the point - he was elected to his last term as governor after he repudiated segregation and racism.
No, that’s not a good idea. Because as I said earlier, the SDMB’s definition of “openly” is rather far from that used by many others.
And because
The more terms like “openly racist” are misused, the less true this becomes. Back when advocating for white supremacy really meant advocating for white supremacy, calling someone a racist meant more than it does now. Because all too often, it just means “you’re racist because you’re part of society, even if you don’t know it and especially if you deny it”.
Unless you want to interpret derisive snickers as a sign of how much they hate it.
Regards,
Shodan
You’re right, I did miss that point. I missed how that had any relevance whatsoever to anything you’re saying. Wallace was super racist, and was so openly. The fact he stopped being one or the other doesn’t really matter; people who know him know him first and foremost because of his racism.
I think there are people who feel they can deny being racist as long as they can find one person somewhere who they can point to as being more racist than them.
“Son, let’s make him deny it.”
It all began with Levon Helm and The Band.
LBJ rescued American from the clutches of Lyndon Johnson.
Define anything as I wish? Okay. To wit:
Scenario 1 - white supremacy is defined as the sum total of all positions, talking points, drivel, and balderdash used by Trump in his campagin to be elected. This person could get as far as the presidency.
Scenario 2 - white supremacy is defined as a belief that all people who are not white should either be deported, or subjected once again to a “life” of slavery. This person couldn’t get elected in anywhere in the US.
Scenario 3 - you explicitly define what “white supremacy” means or the whole discussion will devolve into pointlessness. Just my humble opinion, of course.
Big fan of the non-Canadian Levon Helm, and the Band in general. Not sure where you’re going with this.
Sure, but the campaign you mention was over half a century ago, and Wallace publicly repudiated those views about forty years ago. I don’t deny that there have been truckloads of very successful political candidates openly campaigning with white supremacist beliefs through much of the US’s history, but the OP specifically asks how far such a candidate could get today.
I’ll tackle #3. "White supremacy, for purposes of this discussion, shall mean a philosophy that the Unnited States was created by white people, for white people and should be ruled by white people even if, heavens forbid, whites become an numerical minority. The continued presence, and status, of racial minorities shall be subordinate to whites. Such persons will, of course, be allowed to participate in civic, social and economic activity provided that they explicitly or implicitly acknowledge their status as, for want of a better term, subject people. (IE: Know your role, shut your hole.)
Does this constitute a good start?
Even in 1948, open racists could not get out of the south. I certainly don’t think it has changed today. Of course, to the majority of posters here, Trump is as racist as it gets, but since he denies that there is a racist bone in his body, he is not openly racist. But most Trump supporters understand his racism well enough and either approve or don’t disapprove enough to vote against him.
My answer to the OP is that no, an openly racist candidate could not make it today. Even most of the racists have absorbed the meme that racism = bad and would deny they are racist; they just think they have been victims of affirmative action or something similar.
True, Johnson decided to not run for another term. But Nixon still made Johnson’s presidency a campaign issue; he ran against the “mistakes” that Johnson had made and portrayed Humphrey as a Johnson surrogate.
One is currently president. Seems like the question is answered.