Southern Strategy: Myth or Reality
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 53
  1. #1
    Make America grope again
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,754

    Southern Strategy: Myth or Reality

    Is the Southern Strategy a myth or reality?

    Discuss here.
    Ride more, whine less - HTFU.

    "1/2 of you are wrong and the other .5 are incorrect!" (FlynG)

  2. #2
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
    Is the Southern Strategy a myth or reality?

    Discuss here.
    Who said this, and when? In response to: "Why should an African-American vote Republican?"

    “You really don’t have a reason to, to be honest — we haven’t done a very good job of really giving you one. True? True,”

    “…We have lost sight of the historic, integral link between the party and African-Americans,” NAME said. “This party was co-founded by blacks, among them Frederick Douglass. The Republican Party had a hand in forming the NAACP, and yet we have mistreated that relationship. People don’t walk away from parties, Their parties walk away from them.

    For the last 40-plus years we had a ‘Southern Strategy’ that alienated many minority voters by focusing on the white male vote in the South. Well, guess what happened in 1992, folks, ‘Bubba’ went back home to the Democratic Party and voted for Bill Clinton.”

    Who said it, when? When, 2010. Who, someone who was VERY inside the GOP at the time.

    title of story at link replaced to avoid giving it away too easily | Mediaite
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  3. #3
    Make America grope again
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,754
    This isn't a topic I care to engage in the PO format. I just started this thread to get it off the Detroit thread.

    QQQ, thanks for continuing the conversation here. I appreciate it.
    Ride more, whine less - HTFU.

    "1/2 of you are wrong and the other .5 are incorrect!" (FlynG)

  4. #4
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Who said this, and when? In response to: "Why should an African-American vote Republican?"




    Who said it, when? When, 2010. Who, someone who was VERY inside the GOP at the time.

    title of story at link replaced to avoid giving it away too easily | Mediaite
    The quote from Shelby Steele means nothing. You are taking an isolated quote and extrapolating it to cover the last 50 years to conclude that all PUBs are racists. There is no detail on what he was getting at and he was justifiably criticized and subsequently replaced.

    Here is the link to the previous thread which was actually started by you last fall. Listening to the entire tape was interesting and confirms that Atwater was responding to a hypothetical question concerning how to get votes of Wallace voters.

    It took all of 60 seconds to find it:

    http://forums.roadbikereview.com/pol...pe-295734.html

  5. #5
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    The quote from Shelby Steele means nothing. You are taking an isolated quote and extrapolating it to cover the last 50 years to conclude that all PUBs are racists.

    First, Shelby?

    I never said all republicans are racist, not even close. Your straw man tactics are one big reason I don't bother with you much at all. That and your level of argumentative ability put forth here.

    I have said the GOP has USED racism for electoral gains. Common strategy in many, but not all electoral races, top to bottom of the ticket, for a very long time. Fact. The party has used racism, candidates have used racism, though of course the level of racism of individual republicans varies from zero to eleventy. Obviously.

    For a non-racial example, Reagan seems to have had no problem with gay people personally, but policy wise was very homophobic. And the GOP in the 80s really demonized gay people as perverts with terminal disease. Another historical fact, which you are free to try to wave away to your heart's content.

    I did scan that other thread you linked to. Guess how many numbers you bring from the book you are using to argue? Just guess.
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  6. #6
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    First, Shelby?

    I never said all republicans are racist, not even close. Your straw man tactics are one big reason I don't bother with you much at all. That and your level of argumentative ability put forth here.

    I have said the GOP has USED racism for electoral gains. Common strategy in many, but not all electoral races, top to bottom of the ticket, for a very long time. Fact. The party has used racism, candidates have used racism, though of course the level of racism of individual republicans varies from zero to eleventy. Obviously.

    For a non-racial example, Reagan seems to have had no problem with gay people personally, but policy wise was very homophobic. And the GOP in the 80s really demonized gay people as perverts with terminal disease. Another historical fact, which you are free to try to wave away to your heart's content.

    I did scan that other thread you linked to. Guess how many numbers you bring from the book you are using to argue? Just guess.
    Michael.

    You imply that the Republican party is the party of racism and yet the Democratic party uses the tactic of accusation all the time and keeps bringing it up. It's the party of disparate outcomes which proves racism. And the Democratic party uses accusations of racism to achieve political gains all the time.

    Please stay on point - start your own thread on gays in the 80's - I'm sure that there were many in the Democratic party who shared the same incorrect opinion.

    The book I referenced contains many "numbers" - even some graphs.

    And you still haven't indicated whether you have listened to the entire Atwater tape. I have and posted on the details in your thread of last fall. Keep up the ad homs - I find them amusing and indicative.

  7. #7
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    The book I referenced contains many "numbers" - even some graphs.

    And you still haven't indicated whether you have listened to the entire Atwater tape. I have and posted on the details in your thread of last fall. Keep up the ad homs - I find them amusing and indicative.
    Why have you not provided any numbers or graphs? Seems more like you have read the umpteen right wing blog posts about the book (which tend to be number free) than the book to me. Bring the numbers. Or don't, which is more your pattern.

    As for your question about the interview, I posted the interview. I provide the source material. I check my sources. I posted it to show Atwater said what many on the right wing claimed he never said. And Atwater's ENTIRE career is full of actions that show his quote was accurate in terms of his POLITICAL actions over time. For example: Lee Atwater's 1988 Masterpiece | Top 10 Dirty Political Tricks | TIME.com

    If you want to discuss the interview in more detail, go ahead. You did so in the other thread, and the reaction to your take is there for all to see. But Atwater said what he said, Steele said what he said, Rs said what they said about voter id suppressing the vote, the hands ad, the willie horton ad, and other innumerable pieces of evidence of the southern strategy make it... historical fact.
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  8. #8
    Cycling Dolomiti Friuli
    Reputation: Bill2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,606
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    And you still haven't indicated whether you have listened to the entire Atwater tape.
    Is the Atwater talk available on LP? My 8-track is down for maintenance at the mo.

  9. #9
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Why have you not provided any numbers or graphs? Seems more like you have read the umpteen right wing blog posts about the book (which tend to be number free) than the book to me. Bring the numbers. Or don't, which is more your pattern.

    As for your question about the interview, I posted the interview. I provide the source material. I check my sources. I posted it to show Atwater said what many on the right wing claimed he never said. And Atwater's ENTIRE career is full of actions that show his quote was accurate in terms of his POLITICAL actions over time. For example: Lee Atwater's 1988 Masterpiece | Top 10 Dirty Political Tricks | TIME.com

    If you want to discuss the interview in more detail, go ahead. You did so in the other thread, and the reaction to your take is there for all to see. But Atwater said what he said, Steele said what he said, Rs said what they said about voter id suppressing the vote, the hands ad, the willie horton ad, and other innumerable pieces of evidence of the southern strategy make it... historical fact.
    The book is available for all to see. It is well researched, thought out, and the data (covering many years) supports the conclusions. You, on the other hand, rely on some quotes from a couple of guys and extrapolate that over those same years to "prove your point" ?? But that's how the herd of independent minds functions. Ideas are produced that judged correct based on general agreement with other herd members. Quality of data corroboration (if there is any) is of little consequence. John Lott is a prime example of rejection by the "herd." And you can see reaction in the previous post to again members of the herd who did not bother to listen to the interview. Atwater's infamous quote was in response to a hypothetical question posed by Lamis. He clearly said the words which were in question previously because there was not tape and of course he passed away in a horrible way years before and was not able to use the context of his words in defense. That is clear from the tape but is never mentioned - it's clearly a case of dishonesty by ommission similar to the recent editing of the Zimmerman 911 tape which strongly suggested racial profiling.

    So now your tactic has moved from "proving" that the Southern Strategy is real based on the quotes of Atwater and Steele to questioning my honesty about reading Shafer's book ?? And do you have the honesty to admit the context of Atwater's words ?? This is the crux of the issue with intellectuals - their ideas are never put to the test of accuracy and functionality. How many patents do you have your name on ?? How many things have you designed, prototyped, tested, and released to production resulting in incremental increases in the standard of living for the general public ?? The culmination of the herd's ideas are not functional but merely a consensus of opinion then loosely defended based on "supporting" quotes and isolated instances accompanied by "subtle" personal attacks (see all of your recent posts on this issue directed at me).

    The Southern Strategy is and always has been a myth.

  10. #10
    Cycling Dolomiti Friuli
    Reputation: Bill2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,606
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    The book is available for all to see. It is well researched, thought out, and the data (covering many years) supports the conclusions. You, on the other hand, rely on some quotes from a couple of guys and extrapolate that over those same years to "prove your point" ?? But that's how the herd of independent minds functions. Ideas are produced that judged correct based on general agreement with other herd members. Quality of data corroboration (if there is any) is of little consequence. John Lott is a prime example of rejection by the "herd." And you can see reaction in the previous post to again members of the herd who did not bother to listen to the interview. Atwater's infamous quote was in response to a hypothetical question posed by Lamis. He clearly said the words which were in question previously because there was not tape and of course he passed away in a horrible way years before and was not able to use the context of his words in defense. That is clear from the tape but is never mentioned - it's clearly a case of dishonesty by ommission similar to the recent editing of the Zimmerman 911 tape which strongly suggested racial profiling.

    So now your tactic has moved from "proving" that the Southern Strategy is real based on the quotes of Atwater and Steele to questioning my honesty about reading Shafer's book ?? And do you have the honesty to admit the context of Atwater's words ?? This is the crux of the issue with intellectuals - their ideas are never put to the test of accuracy and functionality. How many patents do you have your name on ?? How many things have you designed, prototyped, tested, and released to production resulting in incremental increases in the standard of living for the general public ?? The culmination of the herd's ideas are not functional but merely a consensus of opinion then loosely defended based on "supporting" quotes and isolated instances accompanied by "subtle" personal attacks (see all of your recent posts on this issue directed at me).

    The Southern Strategy is and always has been a myth.
    You guys really get into this stuff! No idea people were so intense about 40 year old political wonk news.

  11. #11
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    Still no numbers, how about a review of the book also without numbers? By a historian?

    In the spirit of fair use for public education ...

    shaferreveiw1.JPG

    shaferreveiw2.JPG

    shaferreveiw3.JPG

    (might need to open those in a viewer/resize them to read the middle one, depending on browser settings: the full size jpgs are big enough for me to read on screen)

    The author of the review is quite qualified in the area, feel free to look: UAB - Glenn Feldman, Ph.D.

    This book is almost never cited by academics in their own work, it is not taken seriously as useful scholarship. Harvard, Madison, no press release on the book I could find. I even found a review of the book in a journal edited by Shafer at the time... which is ethically suspect to say the least.

    And that concept of race, racial change? Seems to be cooking the books to get the conclusion. When the concepts are flawed, the numbers purporting to to measure them don't really matter. If I say the world is flat, no matter how well I measure things in "straight" lines, the world is not really flat. I can see why so many on the right wing love it. Smells of the Bell Curve; make it sound fancy and the masses will spout the conclusions, and ignore any problems with the research pointed out by others.

    Typical "research" bone for the right wing to chew on. Looks good to them, crap inside.

    The book is not in my library, and I don't think it is worth the hassle of getting it through interlibrary loan. Better things to do with my time than read BS, just so I can fisk it online.
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  12. #12
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    The book is available for all to see. It is well researched, thought out, and the data (covering many years) supports the conclusions.
    A few pages can be accessed at a time via google books. But if you want to use the book, you should provide what the book says to make the argument. Your argument, your responsibility. And if you provide a quote from a page, google books will allow people to find that page with a search. Do at least THAT much.

    Just saying the book exists and says something is an argument by authority, which is a logical fallacy. In case you did not know.

    Questions on their models.

    How did they check for autocorrelation between independent variables?

    How did they correct for any autocorrelation problems?

    How did they model causal connections, did they lag variables? Variable at time one should affect other variables at time 2, 3, or whatever. Economic factors in 1960 have a causal relation to economic factors in 1961, for an obvious example. Unemployment in one year is highly correlated with unemployment in the next year. Lagged variables should be used for causal claims in this case, and lagged variables are HUGELY autocorrelated. So if they did not use lagged variables, they did a bad job, if they did they should have corrected for autocorrelation. How did they handle causal relations in their models, specifically the problem of autocorrelation in time series data?

    If you can't understand these questions, you can't understand their research or the potential problems with their analysis of the data.
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  13. #13
    feh
    feh is online now
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
    Is the Southern Strategy a myth or reality?

    Discuss here.
    Is this a trick question? Who would think it was a myth?
    What's the Matter with Kansas?

  14. #14
    Make America grope again
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,754
    Quote Originally Posted by feh View Post
    Is this a trick question? Who would think it was a myth?
    Just trying to get it off the Detroit Bankruptcy thread.
    Ride more, whine less - HTFU.

    "1/2 of you are wrong and the other .5 are incorrect!" (FlynG)

  15. #15
    Cycling Dolomiti Friuli
    Reputation: Bill2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,606
    Quote Originally Posted by feh View Post
    Is this a trick question? Who would think it was a myth?
    Myth, or International Jewish Banker Conspiracy?

  16. #16
    Make America grope again
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,754
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill2 View Post
    Myth, or International Jewish Banker Conspiracy?
    In 20 years, will we be arguing that the GOP was really pro gay rights and pro abortion?
    Ride more, whine less - HTFU.

    "1/2 of you are wrong and the other .5 are incorrect!" (FlynG)

  17. #17
    Cycling Dolomiti Friuli
    Reputation: Bill2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
    In 20 years, will we be arguing that the GOP was really pro gay rights and pro abortion?
    Yep, posters will have tapes/LPs to prove it. Anyone sayin different will be bleating sheep parroting the lamestream media (parroting sheep?)

  18. #18
    Make America grope again
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,754
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill2 View Post
    Yep, posters will have tapes/LPs to prove it. Anyone sayin different will be bleating sheep parroting the lamestream media (parroting sheep?)
    With advances in science, in 20 years, there will definitely be parroting sheep. To prevent this abomination, we need to stop all experiments in genetic manipulation, now. Hell, to be in the safe side, we need to stop all science now.
    Ride more, whine less - HTFU.

    "1/2 of you are wrong and the other .5 are incorrect!" (FlynG)

  19. #19
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    Quote Originally Posted by feh View Post
    Is this a trick question? Who would think it was a myth?
    Here's a potential causal sequence to getting people to believe it was a myth:

    Academics decide the measure some things (party, race, etc) in certain ways. (One of the things they don't measure is political strategies, btw, not that I have seen, just party, and there are certainly issues with how they seem to be doing that). They take those numbers and run them through an equation. They then say economic factors explain MUCH of the changes in party control. How much, dunno. AM won't give us the numbers, won't give us the R^2 or other measure of variance explained. How robust is the modeling?

    So the book exists, likely riddled with measurement and statistical problems and weaknesses for comparing the strength of the Southern Strategy versus economic changes in terms of level of causal influence. At least from what I have read.

    But the title is provocative, and the right wing noise machine can run with the conclusions. And they have, do a search on the book and see how many. Might even use some selective quotes now and again. But from skimming those posts/articles, I don't see the econometric modeling. Ever. Might be out there, but I don't see it.

    But I see the "Myth" word a lot.

    People see myth, book, proof, the numbers back it since this is SCIENCE (not that they see any of the actual critical numbers to evaluate the claims mind you).... they will use it as evidence for their world view.

    In this case, a world view where ECONOMICS is everything and RACISM is nothing.

    Comforting warm fuzzy for right wingers.

    Bell Curve: bad stats, big sales to and use by people who wanted to see minorities as inferior and thus how they see people as justified not by race, but by those others just being dumb. Same thing.

    Why do people believe in bigfoot in the age of cameras everywhere always? They want to. Why do people believe the southern strategy was a myth? Because they want to.
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  20. #20
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Predictable from the herd of independent minds. And predictable that you would put trust into the herd rather than do your own analysis of Shafer and Johnston's work. Ninety five percent of intellectual academia is liberal and completely bought into the myth. Your references are akin to polling support for the Yankees in Boston. Or the reaction of the Duke faculty to the lacrosse team. So you obviously trust the herd and will join the stampede without bothering to spend any time or honest effort attempting to understand the conclusions and the data that they are based on simply because those conclusions don't fit the liberal construct of the world. You probably have conluded the same about the Bell Curve without having to put in any effort toward understanding the the data collected in that book which are obviously incorrect because of the racial component. And then there is Murray's Coming Apart in which he deliberately focusses on Caucasians to avoid any possibility of accusation of racism. But since he did write Bell Curve that means that he is not worthy of any time spent by the herd and is condemned for daring to continue to explain how our country is declining. I'm getting no where here but it is illuminating to receive additional confirmation of the attitudes which prevail in the US academia.

  21. #21
    Make America grope again
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,754
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    Predictable from the herd of independent minds. And predictable that you would put trust into the herd rather than do your own analysis of Shafer and Johnston's work. Ninety five percent of intellectual academia is liberal and completely bought into the myth. Your references are akin to polling support for the Yankees in Boston. Or the reaction of the Duke faculty to the lacrosse team. So you obviously trust the herd and will join the stampede without bothering to spend any time or honest effort attempting to understand the conclusions and the data that they are based on simply because those conclusions don't fit the liberal construct of the world. You probably have conluded the same about the Bell Curve without having to put in any effort toward understanding the the data collected in that book which are obviously incorrect because of the racial component. And then there is Murray's Coming Apart in which he deliberately focusses on Caucasians to avoid any possibility of accusation of racism. But since he did write Bell Curve that means that he is not worthy of any time spent by the herd and is condemned for daring to continue to explain how our country is declining. I'm getting no where here but it is illuminating to receive additional confirmation of the attitudes which prevail in the US academia.
    "No where?"

    Jesus man, even I can spell nowhere.
    Ride more, whine less - HTFU.

    "1/2 of you are wrong and the other .5 are incorrect!" (FlynG)

  22. #22
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,915
    Quote Originally Posted by QuiQuaeQuod View Post
    Here's a potential causal sequence to getting people to believe it was a myth:

    Academics decide the measure some things (party, race, etc) in certain ways. (One of the things they don't measure is political strategies, btw, not that I have seen, just party, and there are certainly issues with how they seem to be doing that). They take those numbers and run them through an equation. They then say economic factors explain MUCH of the changes in party control. How much, dunno. AM won't give us the numbers, won't give us the R^2 or other measure of variance explained. How robust is the modeling?

    So the book exists, likely riddled with measurement and statistical problems and weaknesses for comparing the strength of the Southern Strategy versus economic changes in terms of level of causal influence. At least from what I have read.

    But the title is provocative, and the right wing noise machine can run with the conclusions. And they have, do a search on the book and see how many. Might even use some selective quotes now and again. But from skimming those posts/articles, I don't see the econometric modeling. Ever. Might be out there, but I don't see it.

    But I see the "Myth" word a lot.

    People see myth, book, proof, the numbers back it since this is SCIENCE (not that they see any of the actual critical numbers to evaluate the claims mind you).... they will use it as evidence for their world view.

    In this case, a world view where ECONOMICS is everything and RACISM is nothing.

    Comforting warm fuzzy for right wingers.

    Bell Curve: bad stats, big sales to and use by people who wanted to see minorities as inferior and thus how they see people as justified not by race, but by those others just being dumb. Same thing.

    Why do people believe in bigfoot in the age of cameras everywhere always? They want to. Why do people believe the southern strategy was a myth? Because they want to.
    Hilarious. This is the kind of thinking produced by the the herd of independent minds. I've actually given you more than the numbers - a source of the entire analysis. The rest is up to you - challenge your beliefs or not. But I understand how hard it is to go against the herd.

    I guess the take away that Q Cubed is suggesting is that believing in Sasquatch is equivalent to not believing in the Southern Strategy. Now there is some original thinking.
    Last edited by AM999; 07-21-2013 at 07:20 PM.

  23. #23
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    Ninety five percent of intellectual academia is liberal and completely bought into the myth.
    A number! Which you made up.

    Quote Originally Posted by AM999 View Post
    \
    I guess the take away that Q Cubed is suggesting is that believing in Sasquatch is equivalent to not believing in the Southern Strategy. Now there is some original thinking.
    And still no reading comprehension.

    I doubt you even read the book, if you did you would bring the numbers, you would bring relevant quotes. I have at least looked at parts, and glanced at some of their peer reviewed journal work. See, I am totally ready for you to bring the numbers. Their numbers, not stuff you make up, or stuff you say they said.

    Which you clearly NEVER will do.

    I am bored with this. But at least you stopped polluting other threads with it, so there's that.
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  24. #24
    gazing from the shadows
    Reputation: QuiQuaeQuod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    26,794
    BTW, if anyone with access to journals would like to see the level of analysis Shafer brings....


    The Transformation of Southern Politics Revisited: The House of Representatives as a Window
    Author(s): Byron E. Shafer and Richard G. C. Johnston Source: British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 31, No. 4 (Oct., 2001), pp. 601-625


    Not a SINGLE significance test to be found, and certainly no causal modeling using time series analysis. Percentages over time, yes, but other than that, no.
    .
    Stout beers under trees, please.

  25. #25
    Cycling Dolomiti Friuli
    Reputation: Bill2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
    With advances in science, in 20 years, there will definitely be parroting sheep. To prevent this abomination, we need to stop all experiments in genetic manipulation, now. Hell, to be in the safe side, we need to stop all science now.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. more fallout from the Southern Strategy
    By feh in forum Politics Only
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-31-2012, 04:27 AM
  2. Braking with carbon versus aluminum rims, myth or reality?
    By gordy748 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-19-2012, 07:00 PM
  3. Carbon frame 'softening'......Myth or reality?
    By frmrench in forum Bikes, Frames and Forks
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-20-2009, 11:24 AM
  4. Sudden Carbon Failure: Reality or Myth?
    By rothko1903a in forum Bikes, Frames and Forks
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-13-2007, 09:40 PM
  5. Knee over pedal spindle a myth or reality?
    By Jaybo in forum Bikes, Frames and Forks
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-26-2005, 01:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.