>mind you...the cleaver endorsement of nixon was just a few
>years after a democratic president signed both the civil
>rights act and the voting rights act.

And while he turned out to make the wrong move (to understate it), his rationale wasn't wrong or at least not entirely wrong. Johnson did not want to sign the voting rights act but eventually caved. He also thought the Civil Rights Act was the right political move, and said some crass things about that. That isn't to say that Republicans provided shit for an alternative, but that POV tells half the story very accurately.

>so its not ahead of its time...as its literally been an
>intentional right wing talking point for decades that they
>convinced more and more black people into making sense of
>('democratic plantation'...dems keep black people loyal with
>welfare and food stamps...etc). and prominent black people
>have said it even in the wake of democrats passing
>historically momentus legislation to help black people.

That is taking it several steps farther than Barkley was, though I can't speak for Cleaver. In the book he was not advocating for either party but rather discussing why he was open to both. I do think Barkley has made a career of fence-riding and definitely drifted in Whitlock/Elder territory at times.

>20 years ago woulda been around the end of the clinton
>era...when the black middle class made its most gains in
>modern history due to clinton job/economic legislation...black
>wage growth was the highest in modern history...and black
>child poverty was the lowest in modern history.
>
>so barkleys line of thinking was just as dumb then as it was
>now. and the black people that say it tend to be the ones
>that know the least about politics (grifters, youtube pundits,
>rappers, etc).

It's not accurate but you get the sentiment behind it and it makes you think about your own beliefs. It isn't on the same level as the type of assholes you're talking about. Looking at it from the outside, I get why some people feel that way because it is sort of a bad cop/worse cop situation--over all and certainly when it comes to race--in politics. The idea is that one party more or less upholds the status quo and the other tries to open up progressive pathways. Instead we generally have an actively reactionary party and the left is often upholding the status quo (we are talking on a federal level here, at least). You also have some commodification going on, where there is political currency to oppression and disparity. I get the resentment there but of course the conclusion of supporting the right is absurd. It's like saying you don't like wearing a cast so you are going to amputate your leg.