Talk:Yellow dog Democrat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Why "Yellow"?

So why a "Yellow" dog? Was yellow a common color for dogs in the South during that time period? Were yellow dogs more likely to be mutts or otherwise undesirable? Was it a reference to coyotes? -- 20:50, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I always heard that Yellow Dog Democrats would vote for a yellow dog before a Republican. But see my post below that I'm confused about exactly what a yellow dog dem is. Nunn08 22:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Let us remember that "Yellow" is a term for cowardly, so we may not be looking at an issue of COLOR but rather an issue of "I would rather vote for a cowardly dog than a Republican." 66.65.55.108 18:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this phrase can honestly be related to the "Carolina Dog," given that the specific breed of "Carolina Dog" was only identified as a unique breed in the 1970's? mwcob 08:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this. The wikipedia article states that the Carolina dog was discovered in the 1970s, anyone think we should change the etymological section on this article? It seems that the "vote for a yellow dog" line of etymology seems a little more believable. 66.65.55.108 18:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I Thought...

I Thought Yellow Dog Democrats were very devoted democrats, no matter they're political affiliation or geographical location. I guess I'm wrong.Nunn08 22:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "...would vote for a yellow dog if it was on the Democratic ticket."

I have never heard this phrase used to say that a democrat would rather vote for a yellow dog than a Republican. It's always like this, "Those Democrats would vote for a yellow dog if it ran on the Democrat ticket." It is not a statement of hatred towards Republicans (though that might be infered) but it refers to a voter that will vote for any inferior or unknown candidate because they are on the democrat slate. In political campaigns or organizations that have elections this can be applied to other parties or factions within parties. I want to change the article a bit but I know this is an old term and I am rather young so it's possible I am wrong but I have heard this a lot and I doubt it. If someone has better information it would be appreciated. --Victoria h 05:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are wrong. The information here is correct. In fact I have always heard it as "I would rather vote for a mangy yellow dog then a Republician." For some reason it is toned down in this article. -- Xltel 21:50, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Victoria seems less than fluent in idiomatic American; a yellow dog Democrat would use "Democratic ticket". Btw, this capitalization seems almost universal in writing on the subject; my only question is if we should go to the technically more grammatical "yellow-dog Democrat"? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please assist

I have made some additions to this subject but it is my first time so I was unsure of a few editing points. For one, I have included the title of a book (no worries, checked with Gaslight and it is available to quote). However, I do not know how to underline it as a book title should be in the text.

Also, I am sure there are many wikilinks that could be made both within the document and at the bottom of the document but I could not figure out how to do in the time I've allowed. I specifically would like a wikilink to Carolina dogs in it. I added external links but they only show up as numbers, so that's messed up.

I've also quoted a letter that is a geneological document and should be well outside of copyright protection as of May of this year, if it ever was copyrighted, as I understand copyright protections. Can someone confirm?

I'm a research maven, not an English teacher, so please check over for any grammatical errors or such. I am a Southerner after all and all y'all talk funny.

Thanks!

--Curiouskat 00:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

PS, I'm continuing my research because I could swear that somewhere I have seen the original attributable quotation, and I'm stubborn like that. Meantime, I am conducting and posting my research at my blog http://demokat.blogspot.com/ which I am not advertising here, just inviting you to lift whatever is there to here if you see something there you think should be here. You have my permission and my blessing. I don't have time to keep up Wikipedia, my blog, and my life all at once. Research is time consuming enough because you have to sift through all these dad-blamed blogs out there on Google and Ask. Darn blogs.

[edit] Defensiveness in etymology section

The etymology section gets very defensive in pushing a certain POV. I happen to agree with this POV, but the defensiveness just makes it sound ridiculous. —RuakhTALK 01:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The article and this section is not sourced (ext links aren't as effective as references/source), and the etymology section is too long, too defensive for a term that has a simple meaning. And it doesn't flow well. A good rewrite, with sourcing, would improve article. Journalist1983 13:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the section. It was unsourced, and I don't think any of it was both clearly true and relevant to this article. --Allen (talk) 12:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)