When did the parties switch platforms? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:29:05 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  When did the parties switch platforms? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: When did the parties switch platforms?  (Read 25385 times)
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« on: January 05, 2016, 01:32:17 PM »

On Economics- GOP has always been more right wing
Foreign Policy- They were about the same until the 1970s when the GOP became more hawkish
Social Policy- Gradual from truman to lbj

Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2016, 05:15:10 PM »

It was a gradual thing from the 1960's to the 1980's. Since then it has only been further.

So you're actually prepared to argue the GOP of the 1930s was to the right of the Democratic Party during that same time frame? Because you'd be like factually wrong.

Okay, Jesus, let's just answer the question in the sarcastic OP that so many people took seriously:

THEY DIDN'T.

The GOP of the 1930s was clearly more right wing then the Democrats
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2016, 10:12:52 PM »




Red - States that voted majority R before 1964 and majority D since 1964
Blue - States that voted majority D before 1964 and majority R since 1964
Green - States that voted majority R both before and after 1964
Orange - States that voted majority D both before and after 1964
Yellow - States that voted for both parties equally before 1964 and majority R since 1964

This seems to imply (correctly) that either the parties or the states switched platforms sometime around 1964.

Calvin Coolidge was not more liberal then FDR then Wilson in any way. FDR and Wilson dominated the south while Coolidge dominated the North east and west
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2018, 01:55:34 PM »

On an economic level, from ~1860 to ~1925 the two were roughly even, but after this the Democrats became markedly more economically liberal. On social issues, the switch happened on a presidential level from ~1964 to ~1984, but took some time to percolate down ballot. As a result, it would be accurate to say the GOP during much of the 19th and 20th centuries was the more “liberal” party. Nowadays, this is clearly not true.

How many GOP nominees from 1896-1996 was more liberal than the Democratic one lol(There is only 1 and that is 1904)


The fact is ever since the election of 1896 the GOP has been the more conservative party, and the election of 1912 solidified it.


Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2018, 09:25:20 PM »

On an economic level, from ~1860 to ~1925 the two were roughly even, but after this the Democrats became markedly more economically liberal. On social issues, the switch happened on a presidential level from ~1964 to ~1984, but took some time to percolate down ballot. As a result, it would be accurate to say the GOP during much of the 19th and 20th centuries was the more “liberal” party. Nowadays, this is clearly not true.

How many GOP nominees from 1896-1996 was more liberal than the Democratic one lol(There is only 1 and that is 1904)


The fact is ever since the election of 1896 the GOP has been the more conservative party, and the election of 1912 solidified it.



I wonder if TR had won the GOP nomination in 1912 instead of running third party, if that would have taken the party in a progressive direction for the foreseeable future.


depends on if Wilson still gets elected or not . If Wilson still gets elected almost certainly not , if Taft wins maybe.

Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2018, 05:56:38 PM »

On an economic level, from ~1860 to ~1925 the two were roughly even, but after this the Democrats became markedly more economically liberal. On social issues, the switch happened on a presidential level from ~1964 to ~1984, but took some time to percolate down ballot. As a result, it would be accurate to say the GOP during much of the 19th and 20th centuries was the more “liberal” party. Nowadays, this is clearly not true.

How many GOP nominees from 1896-1996 was more liberal than the Democratic one lol(There is only 1 and that is 1904)


The fact is ever since the election of 1896 the GOP has been the more conservative party, and the election of 1912 solidified it.



In 1924, 1916, 1908, 1904. From 1896-1932, the GOP was more liberal most of the time.


1924 LMAO , Calvin Coolidge was probably the most conservative president since the 1850s and ran on his record of huge tax cuts , enforcing prohibition , making government smaller , and restricting immigration.


1916 lol again Wilson was clearly more liberal than Hughes

1908 Bryan was clearly more liberal than Taft
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2018, 07:04:14 PM »

On an economic level, from ~1860 to ~1925 the two were roughly even, but after this the Democrats became markedly more economically liberal. On social issues, the switch happened on a presidential level from ~1964 to ~1984, but took some time to percolate down ballot. As a result, it would be accurate to say the GOP during much of the 19th and 20th centuries was the more “liberal” party. Nowadays, this is clearly not true.

How many GOP nominees from 1896-1996 was more liberal than the Democratic one lol(There is only 1 and that is 1904)


The fact is ever since the election of 1896 the GOP has been the more conservative party, and the election of 1912 solidified it.



In 1924, 1916, 1908, 1904. From 1896-1932, the GOP was more liberal most of the time.


1924 LMAO , Calvin Coolidge was probably the most conservative president since the 1850s and ran on his record of huge tax cuts , enforcing prohibition , making government smaller , and restricting immigration.


1916 lol again Wilson was clearly more liberal than Hughes

1908 Bryan was clearly more liberal than Taft
Coolidge's opponent opposed child labor laws and anti-lynching laws while Coolidge supported both.

Bryan was perhaps the most liberal politician of his time, but is often misremembered thanks to the Scopes Trial. What few remember is that the time, evolution was being used to justify eugenics and social darwinism.

Coolidge at the state level was much much different than the Coolidge at the Presidential Level. Presidential Coolidge probably is the most conservative President since at least the 1850s.


Here is the 1924 Democratic Platform: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29593

They slam the GOP for being in bed with Big Business and supporting a tax policy that helps the rich.





Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2018, 10:12:45 PM »

Could people stop with this insane idea that the Republicans were ever a "liberal" party in the American sense? They have been the party of big business and Wall Street from the 1870s to present. Hell, they weren't even "liberal" in the European sense in the 19th century: they were arch-protectionists and major supporters of high tariffs (both for protecting American business and for revenue purposes).

The big shift isn't in the party platforms so much as who made up the party. The mass defection of African-Americans from the GOP to the Dems from 1930s-1960s ended up making the Northern Democrats the party of civil rights (can't get elected in NY or IL or etc without the black vote), which alienated white conservative Southern Democrats and gradually pushed them into the GOP in the 1970s-2000s. It's inaccurate to say the parties "switched platforms" generally, though. The main groups that made up the GOP in the 1920s (big business, highly-paid professionals, Midwestern farmers) are still all mostly Republican groups, while the main groups behind Northern Democrats (recent immigrants, labor unionists, religious minorities, the poor) are mainly still Democratic voting blocs.

Most people can't see past "racist Alabama redneck voted Democrat in 1890, racist Alabama redneck voted Republican in 2016; conclusion: parties are opposite now."

LOL exactly.

One sentence argument: There has literally never been a time from the GOP's founding in the 1850s to present at which the Republican Party wasn't the party of Wall Street and Big Business.
Progressive Era.


and the GOP basically drove Teddy out of the party


Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2018, 12:23:02 PM »



I would say 1896 not 1908


McKinley was way to the right of Bryan and TR actually was put on the ticket because being a vp then meant the end to Presidential aspirations
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2018, 02:16:18 PM »

This does not mean the parties haven’t radically changed over time, but if you believe “the parties switched,” you are dumb.  No way around it.

Sorry, Old School!


Well I said 1896 when Democrats became solidly the more left wing party

From 1876-1896 both parties were basically the same
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2018, 05:28:43 PM »
« Edited: March 24, 2018, 05:53:32 PM by Old School Republican »

Could people stop with this insane idea that the Republicans were ever a "liberal" party in the American sense? They have been the party of big business and Wall Street from the 1870s to present. Hell, they weren't even "liberal" in the European sense in the 19th century: they were arch-protectionists and major supporters of high tariffs (both for protecting American business and for revenue purposes).

The big shift isn't in the party platforms so much as who made up the party. The mass defection of African-Americans from the GOP to the Dems from 1930s-1960s ended up making the Northern Democrats the party of civil rights (can't get elected in NY or IL or etc without the black vote), which alienated white conservative Southern Democrats and gradually pushed them into the GOP in the 1970s-2000s. It's inaccurate to say the parties "switched platforms" generally, though. The main groups that made up the GOP in the 1920s (big business, highly-paid professionals, Midwestern farmers) are still all mostly Republican groups, while the main groups behind Northern Democrats (recent immigrants, labor unionists, religious minorities, the poor) are mainly still Democratic voting blocs.

Most people can't see past "racist Alabama redneck voted Democrat in 1890, racist Alabama redneck voted Republican in 2016; conclusion: parties are opposite now."

LOL exactly.

One sentence argument: There has literally never been a time from the GOP's founding in the 1850s to present at which the Republican Party wasn't the party of Wall Street and Big Business.
Progressive Era.


and the GOP basically drove Teddy out of the party




In 1916, TR addressed the Progressive Party, stating that the best thing Progressives could do was to rejoin the GOP, which many did.

And had no power from 1920-1932


The GOP in the 1920s probably the most right wing American party which held power since the 1850s
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #11 on: March 26, 2018, 02:32:08 AM »

The one constant is that Republicans have always had more support from small business owners, from family farmers tired of competing with slave labor in 1856 straight through to 2016.  Big business has been somewhere between uniformly Republican (1856-76, 1920-1992) to tilting Republican overall with some sectors voting heavily Democratic (1880-1916, 1996ish-present).

I have a hard time believing any sector of Big Business voted for Bryan or Wilson
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2018, 11:15:56 AM »

Hard to pinpoint exactly, but if I had to I would say it started in 1896 with the Democratic nomination of William Jennings Bryan, alienating the Bourbon Democrats, and finished in 1964 passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Republican nomination of Goldwater.

Every new responder to this topic should have to read every single word of NC Yankee's posts in this thread.
My opinion is democrats became a truly liberal party(neither party was   before 1896) with William Jennings Bryan taking over the party and with exception of Alton Parker , John Davis , and Bill Clinton the have not had a nominee since then who wasn’t a solid liberal
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2018, 12:10:27 PM »

Hard to pinpoint exactly, but if I had to I would say it started in 1896 with the Democratic nomination of William Jennings Bryan, alienating the Bourbon Democrats, and finished in 1964 passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Republican nomination of Goldwater.

Every new responder to this topic should have to read every single word of NC Yankee's posts in this thread.
My opinion is democrats became a truly liberal party(neither party was   before 1896) with William Jennings Bryan taking over the party and with exception of Alton Parker , John Davis , and Bill Clinton the have not had a nominee since then who wasn’t a solid liberal

But a "switch" implies a time when the Republican Party was decidedly to the "left" of the Democrats, and given that we can't just place simplistic things like "states' rights" or "racism" on some simplified political spectrum that transcends hundreds of years and several eras (the way we can, arguably, do with class issues, immigration and moralism), this is an assertion that I flatly reject and contend that you have to be - at best - very misinformed to accept.

Yah both parties did not flip (your right about that)


What I think happened was that the Republican party has always been the party of Business and Industry and for the first part of the Industrial Revolution(until say around the mid 1870s) being the party of Industry was considered more "liberal" because the Democratic party was dominated by agrarians which was considered more conservative.

Basically, after that system collapsed the Democrats spent 20 years basically being Republican lite(1876-1896) then Labor and Populists in 1896 decided to basically give up on trying to take over the GOP and move to take over the Dems and they were successful because the dems really didnt have anything strong enough to prevent that from happening(since the agrarians long had been gone by that point).


That basically made the democrats the more leftist party and have been since then.


The GOP though has basically stayed constant the whole time(in their core base)
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2018, 09:10:02 PM »

How is a group of people born of an elitist conservative tradition, count as being "Liberal".

Also I would point out that WJB was by every definition of the word pro-agrarian and he was leading the revolution against the business dominated bourbon Democrats. The Populists were agrarians. You see this is what happens when you try to postulate a flip, even in 1896. It doesn't work because it fails to understand tradition, shifting of interests and yet historical consistency within the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party believed in several core principles.
1. Expanding voting beyond landed and wealthy classes to all white males
2. Religious Freedom
3. Freedom of Trade
4. Pro-Agriculture
5. Anti-Establishment and Business/Banker Elite

This was Andrew Jackson's Democratic Party, and it is firmly within the confines of a 19th century Liberal party.

In the 1880's the party began to split because the middle class and business oriented groups who joined the party (either because they wanted free trade, or were Southerners and hated Yankees, or what have you), were following the proscribes of Jefferson and Jackson on limited government, and enterprise freed from the restriction of elite monopolies. Cleveland was also very much in line with this tradition.

However, William Jennings Bryan was also an heir to this tradition, running against policies that benefited the wealthy and supporting those that would help farmers and miners instead. He is just as agrarian as Jefferson and Jackson were, but he is rallying the same types of voters in the same basic places as they did, against the same group of people (NE Business elites).

WJB was thus a reaffirmation of the tradition of Jeffersonian and Jacksonian politics, even as he was embracing and indeed paving the way for a tradition towards utilizing government action to advance their cause, rather than seeing government as merely a way to facilitate and entrench elite monopolies.

1796
Adams: Conservative
Jefferson: Liberal

1832
Clay: Conservative
Jackson: Liberal

1896
McKinley: Conservative
WJB: Liberal

There are a number of similarities in terms of support, policies and traditions that link the Federalist, Whig and Republican candidates listed here. All of them were protectionists to verying degrees. All of them were tied to wealthy business people in the NE. All of them were Protestant Moralists (McKinley is not as well known but he is compared to Bush 43 in his religiosity). All of them supported industry over agriculture. Yet suddenly in 1896, McKinley finds himself as the first Conservative to run against as liberal on the Democratic side?


Well The Federalists , Whigs, and Republicans were always the pro buisness party that’s true .


And yes while the Democratic Republicans were more liberal than the Fedralists and Democrats more liberal than the Whigs , that Democratic Party was totally different than the Democrats of the third party system (which was when the Republican Party was created).


The Democrats of the first half third party system had become a totally different party and due to that  reactionary  (their support of slavery and trying to keep the agrarian dominated economy from being replaced by an industrial economy). They really didn’t stand for anything in that period other than that . The Republicans originally were basically comprised of Pro Buisness groups and people who opposed the 1850s Democratic Party (and it was made up of both Conservatives and Liberals who used to be Democrats pre 1850s).


It was really in 1876 they moved away from that(after spending the whole 1852-1876 period being a reactionary party) but they morphed into becoming a Republican lite party(Borbon Democrats) .Then in 1896 Labor took over the party and they once again became the solidly Liberal party . While yes Bryan was an agrarian he IMO was a totally different type of one because in my opinion he was that because he was one because by then the agricultural sector was no longer the dominant economic sector and Big Buisness abuse of power was hurting them too . So I think it was more Labor and Agrarians were aligned for a temporary moment because of that .



In my opinion these are the phases the Democrats have gone through :

1824-1848 : Classical Liberal Party who supported the things you mentioned above
1848-1852: A transition phase
1852-1872: A southern reactionary party
1872-1876 : Transition Phase
1876-1896: Bourbon Democrats
1896 convention : Transition Phase
1896 - 1984 : A Modern Liberal Party dominated by pro labor politics
1984- 1992 : Transition Phase
1992- Present: Neo Liberal Party

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.05 seconds with 12 queries.