Would you have been a Democrat or a Whig

[MATTROSE94]

Probably a reluctant Whig voter. Might have voted for Martin Van Buren with hindsight in 1836 and 1840, but by and large, I would have held my nose and voted the Whig ticket.

[Frodo]

Whigs became Republicans for the most part (and their platform was incorporated), so I have to assume I would have been a Whig. 

[Brother Jonathan]

Very firmly in the Whig camp, even if I agreed with certain Democrats on some issues.

[KaiserDave]

Probably a conscience Whig who agreed with the Democrats on certain issues. The 2nd Party system is pretty terrible.

[Aurelius]

Swing voter. There are things I very firmly think the Whigs were right about, things I very firmly think the Democrats were right about, and things where I think both parties completely lost the plot.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Whigs became Republicans for the most part

In the North, sure, but a sizable contingent in the abandoned politics (Speaker Winthrop for example) or embraced the Democrats.

In the North I would say somewhere between 65% and 75% of Whigs became Republicans depending on the state. A number of Republicans were also ex Free Soilers or Van Buren style Democrats as well so that needs to be factored in.

In the South, 80% of Whigs would be Democrats by the end of reconstruction and many of them in leading positions within the ranks of "Bourbon Democracy" in the region. 

(and their platform was incorporated)

largely incorporated with some modifications, but this assumes that the Whigs had a unified and distinct platform, which they did not hence their divisions. The bulk of Clay's economic agenda was embraced minus for instance the Bank of the United States and Republicans would very quickly embrace Gold and Hard Money (Grant and Hayes, with Harrison representing a short term deviation from this stance), in contrast to the soft money stance of the Whigs.

The Whigs also favored selling the land in the west to speculators, while Lincoln's program of giving the land to homesteaders was much more Jeffersonian/Jacksonian and much more egalitarian.

[LabourJersey]

Probably the Whigs if limited to this. Given that I'm more educated, Protestant, a statist and honestly a little bit of an elitist.

However I probably would have left the Whigs after the Mexican War for the Liberty party/the fringe abolitionist parties of the time. I also profoundly dislike Henry Clay (no 1812 War Hawk should have stayed in politics honestly--same as the Iraq/Bush War Hawks) which is a big strike against the Whigs.

[Lechasseur]

Probably a Whig

[Goldwater]

Barnburner Democrat.

[Vice President Christian Man]

Whigs became Republicans for the most part

In the North, sure, but a sizable contingent in the abandoned politics (Speaker Winthrop for example) or embraced the Democrats.

In the North I would say somewhere between 65% and 75% of Whigs became Republicans depending on the state. A number of Republicans were also ex Free Soilers or Van Buren style Democrats as well so that needs to be factored in.

In the South, 80% of Whigs would be Democrats by the end of reconstruction and many of them in leading positions within the ranks of "Bourbon Democracy" in the region. 

(and their platform was incorporated)

largely incorporated with some modifications, but this assumes that the Whigs had a unified and distinct platform, which they did not hence their divisions. The bulk of Clay's economic agenda was embraced minus for instance the Bank of the United States and Republicans would very quickly embrace Gold and Hard Money (Grant and Hayes, with Harrison representing a short term deviation from this stance), in contrast to the soft money stance of the Whigs.

The Whigs also favored selling the land in the west to speculators, while Lincoln's program of giving the land to homesteaders was much more Jeffersonian/Jacksonian and much more egalitarian.

Don’t forget about Kentucky