was it just happenstance that the parties ended up the way they were

[freepcrusher]

I mean if history had went slightly differently - is it possible that the republicans would be the liberal party and democrats the conservative ones? Look at the 1948 presidential election county map for instance. Both parties had there share of liberal and conservative areas voting for them.

It's also interesting to look at where the candidates were from. One was a Missouri-Kentucky ticket. The other was a New York (by way of Michigan) California ticket that included the future architect of liberal judicial decisions.

[freepcrusher]

The Republican Party has been the more conservative party for something like 150 years now.

Just go read the umpteen posts by North Carolina Yankee on the subject.

Or are you like your fellow D-IA avatar HenryWallaceVP and believe in muh party switching?

SNCY is someone who is right at some level but is the epitome of TLDR posting. It's not so much that Rs were conservative and Ds were liberal or vice versa. It's that you had conservatives and liberals in both parties.

It's difficult because there's no national referendum - but it would be interesting to see what would happen if there was a referendum on banning CPUSA. I wouldn't be surprised if otherwise wealthy republican areas like Bergen County had a higher % of no votes than western Kentucky (which at the time was heavily democratic voting).

[freepcrusher]

I suppose that, had the Dewey wing of the GOP won out, we could have ended up with Bloombergite Republicans vs. Manchinite Democrats.

that's good because it would have excluded the Eagle Forum/Concerned Women for America/Ted Cruz type of conservatives from respectable politics. Manchin (and Chris Smith from NJ) while culturally conservative, is not the same thing as what I just mentioned.