You gave totals but for a different issue southern vs northern rather than conservative vs liberal.
I've already pointed that out to you but apparently you either didn't read it, ignored it after reading it, or forgot it.
Instead of broad geographical distinctions I looked at the actual historical political information about a dozen senators. A few were Republican. Despite liberal Republicans (just like conservative Democrats) being more common in the past I'm fine with excluding them from consideration of liberal for now. That left us with 8 Democrats who voted for the law. All of them where from the south. Half of them were liberal. 1 or 2 could be reasonably considered conservative, the others I couldn't come to any conclusion about, not enough information on them.
So looking at the actual population in question "southern equals conservative" is extremely dubious, and "liberals didn't vote against the 1964 civil rights act" is refuted at least if you mean that in absolute terms, and dubious if your less literal and absolute about it.
You should, using deductive logic , see what was going on clearly.
It would only work as deductive logic given unsupported, and even apparently false premises like "southern equals conservative".
A weaker case could be made from what you presented as a matter of induction rather than deduction, but such a case would be fairly well refuted by what I posted.
Of course you could challenge what I posted. You could look at the four names I gave you and try to argue they weren't liberals. Or you could look at the rest of the Democratic senators who voted against the bill (I only looked at about half and only named the four who were clearly IMO liberal out of the half that I looked at, but there were 21 in total) and try to claim my sample was unrepresentative. But you'd prefer to assume that southern and conservative were exactly the same, or to attack me rather then countering the information and arguments I present. |
