New York in the latter half of the 19th century

[skybridge]

How come New York differed with most of New England for a good chunk of the latter half of the 19th century?

[Defarge]

In terms of presidential election results? I'd imagine a combination of a greater number of immigrants and Tammany ensuring NYC would go overwhelmingly Democratic.

[skybridge]

So the immigrants (assuming they have voting rights!) would go for the Democrats?

[Defarge]

So the immigrants (assuming they have voting rights!) would go for the Democrats?

Yes.  The famous political machines of the 19th century were built on the votes of immigrants.  In the 19th century, your ethnic and religious background usually determined how you voted.  Immigrants  , Catholics, and Southerners voted Democratic.  Protestant Northerners and African Americans voted Republican.

[skybridge]

So the immigrants (assuming they have voting rights!) would go for the Democrats?

Yes.  The famous political machines of the 19th century were built on the votes of immigrants.  In the 19th century, your ethnic and religious background usually determined how you voted.  Immigrants  , Catholics, and Southerners voted Democratic.  Protestant Northerners and African Americans voted Republican.

Not exactly part of this topic, but oh well: Interesting how the KKK endorsed candidates like Kalvin Koolidge [sic] when the Democrats were still the party of the south.

[KillerPollo]

We needed someone like Charles Foster Kane back in those days

[PBrunsel]

Irish Immigrants

[Rob]

Not exactly part of this topic, but oh well: Interesting how the KKK endorsed candidates like Kalvin Koolidge [sic] when the Democrats were still the party of the south.

The reason is that the "second Klan" of the 1920's was not a southern institution. The KKK was strongest not in Mississippi and Alabama (though it certainly had its adherents there); it was strongest in the northern states of Oregon and Indiana. The organization's doctrine of "Native, White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant Supremacy" held strong appeal for northern whites (even New York City had a strong chapter). A great many of these new Klansmen were Republicans, traditional supporters of the Party of Lincoln.

As for Klammy Kool Kalvin Koolidge (the name taken from a Democratic poster attacking him for being supported by the Klan): he refused to denounce the KKK, while both Democrat John Davis and Progressive Robert LaFollette openly attacked the organization throughout the campaign.

[skybridge]

Irish Immigrants

Would you care to elaborate on that?

[PBrunsel]

Irish Immigrants

Would you care to elaborate on that?

Tammany Hall used Irish Immigrants to vote en masse from 1850 to about 1930. Irish have been traditionaly Democratic anyway. Them being urban and Catholic they were the perfect voter targets for Tweed and his men.

[patrick1]

Irish Immigrants

Would you care to elaborate on that?

Tammany Hall used Irish Immigrants to vote en masse from 1850 to about 1930. Irish have been traditionaly Democratic anyway. Them being urban and Catholic they were the perfect voter targets for Tweed and his men.

Tammany and the Irish had a neat little deal set up.  The Irish were expected to vote Democrat; early and often, and in exchange they were given civil servant jobs on the police and fire department.  Other factors were: The ward bosses were very powerful at the time and controlled jobs, contracts and housing, Further,  the secret ballot was not introduced into the United States until 1892.

[skybridge]

Irish Immigrants

Would you care to elaborate on that?

Tammany Hall used Irish Immigrants to vote en masse from 1850 to about 1930. Irish have been traditionaly Democratic anyway. Them being urban and Catholic they were the perfect voter targets for Tweed and his men.

Tammany and the Irish had a neat little deal set up.  The Irish were expected to vote Democrat; early and often, and in exchange they were given civil servant jobs on the police and fire department.  Other factors were: The ward bosses were very powerful at the time and controlled jobs, contracts and housing, Further,  the secret ballot was not introduced into the United States until 1892.

And that all contributed to making New York generally more liberal than New England in those days or...?

[Rob]

And that all contributed to making New York generally more liberal than New England in those days or...?

No, by today's standards the Democrats were conservative and the Republicans were liberal. The Democrats supported free trade, low taxes, states' rights, wanted a smaller federal government, and opposed civil rights.

[skybridge]

And that all contributed to making New York generally more liberal than New England in those days or...?

No, by today's standards the Democrats were conservative and the Republicans were liberal. The Democrats supported free trade, low taxes, states' rights, wanted a smaller federal government, and opposed civil rights.

No, by today's standards the parties may have reversed their stance on the issues, but in their respective frame of reference the Republican party was always the party of big money, and the Democrats always sought to represent the average man.

[Rob]

No, by today's standards the parties may have reversed their stance on the issues, but in their respective frame of reference the Republican party was always the party of big money, and the Democrats always sought to represent the average man.

That's true, but the Democrats had their own business base. Financiers liked free trade, and so they supported the party; the GOP was supported by industrialists who wanted high tariffs. Also, in the western states businessmen tended to be Democrats, while the workers tended to be Republicans.

In any case, the voting division then wasn't economic; it was cultural. Civil War memories trumped all other issues for decades, and only the tariff came close as an issue.

[skybridge]

No, by today's standards the parties may have reversed their stance on the issues, but in their respective frame of reference the Republican party was always the party of big money, and the Democrats always sought to represent the average man.

That's true, but the Democrats had their own business base. Financiers liked free trade, and so they supported the party; the GOP was supported by industrialists who wanted high tariffs. Also, in the western states businessmen tended to be Democrats, while the workers tended to be Republicans.

In any case, the voting division then wasn't economic; it was cultural. Civil War memories trumped all other issues for decades, and only the tariff came close as an issue.

How would you say Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson (yes, I know, this is a tad later than this thread is concerned with) represented their parties respectively?

[Rob]

How would you say Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson (yes, I know, this is a tad later than this thread is concerned with) represented their parties respectively?

That doesn't relate to this thread, because after 1896 the political situation was completely different. Anyway, I'd say TR represented the GOP well. He was part of the progressive Republican tradition, leading back to abolitionism. Wilson did not represent his party well.  Bryan began the process of breaking the Democratic Party from its conservatism; Wilson completed it.

[Gustaf]

I agree with Goldwater that the Civil War was the dominating issue until Bryan really laid the foundation for the modern party system. Basically populism, IMO, was a cross-party-issue and the Bryan vs McKinley election meant that it became a decisive factor for party allegiance, making the Democrats the party of the left and the Republicans the party of the right. The realignements since then are merely results of the evolution of the left and right respectively.

Isn't it the case though that the Democrats got the minorities and the Republicans the New England elite throughout the entire 19th century?

[Rob]

Isn't it the case though that the Democrats got the minorities and the Republicans the New England elite throughout the entire 19th century?

In the Northeast, yes. The immigrants and urban poor voted Democratic, both because of boss control and because the Republicans supported nativist policies such as prohibition. The WASP elite voted Republican because they were hungry for higher tariffs, many of them being in high industry.

However, in the rest of the country this was reversed. In the old Confederacy, the Bourbon elite were staunchly Democratic and the poorest citizens- blacks and "white trash" Unionists- voted Republican. In the West, the prosperous merchants and business leaders were quite often Democrats, while their employees- identifying with Lincoln's ideal of the common man- voted Republican.

[skybridge]

Isn't it the case though that the Democrats got the minorities and the Republicans the New England elite throughout the entire 19th century?

In the Northeast, yes. The immigrants and urban poor voted Democratic, both because of boss control and because the Republicans supported nativist policies such as prohibition. The WASP elite voted Republican because they were hungry for higher tariffs, many of them being in high industry.

However, in the rest of the country this was reversed. In the old Confederacy, the Bourbon elite were staunchly Democratic and the poorest citizens- blacks and "white trash" Unionists- voted Republican. In the West, the prosperous merchants and business leaders were quite often Democrats, while their employees- identifying with Lincoln's ideal of the common man- voted Republican.

So, do you think I might have been a Republican in those days?

[Beet]

Isn't it the case though that the Democrats got the minorities and the Republicans the New England elite throughout the entire 19th century?

In the Northeast, yes. The immigrants and urban poor voted Democratic, both because of boss control and because the Republicans supported nativist policies such as prohibition. The WASP elite voted Republican because they were hungry for higher tariffs, many of them being in high industry.

However, in the rest of the country this was reversed. In the old Confederacy, the Bourbon elite were staunchly Democratic and the poorest citizens- blacks and "white trash" Unionists- voted Republican. In the West, the prosperous merchants and business leaders were quite often Democrats, while their employees- identifying with Lincoln's ideal of the common man- voted Republican.

Wow, thats pretty interesting. I had no idea that poor whites in the south and west voted Republican while the wealthier ones voted Democrat.

Gustaf- also interesting... are you sure that's the case with every presidential election though? I'm wondering on 1904, 1920, 1924,  1928, and even 1932 with prohibition and FDR's balanced budget campaign promises.

[Sam Spade]

Isn't it the case though that the Democrats got the minorities and the Republicans the New England elite throughout the entire 19th century?

In the Northeast, yes. The immigrants and urban poor voted Democratic, both because of boss control and because the Republicans supported nativist policies such as prohibition. The WASP elite voted Republican because they were hungry for higher tariffs, many of them being in high industry.

However, in the rest of the country this was reversed. In the old Confederacy, the Bourbon elite were staunchly Democratic and the poorest citizens- blacks and "white trash" Unionists- voted Republican. In the West, the prosperous merchants and business leaders were quite often Democrats, while their employees- identifying with Lincoln's ideal of the common man- voted Republican.

Wow, thats pretty interesting. I had no idea that poor whites in the south and west voted Republican while the wealthier ones voted Democrat.

It's a very true and honest point.  Some of strongest areas of Republican sentiment in the latter half of the 19th century outside of the Deep South (which had very few Republican areas) were specifically in the mountainous areas of the upper South, which had very anti-slavery sentiments before and after the Civil War.

However, in the post-Reconstruction Deep South, one of the stories that must be noted is that of the Populist party, which gained great control among poor whites and blacks in the 1880s and 1890s in its opposition to Democratic party politics among the wealthy Southern elites. 

The nomination of William Jennings Bryan by the Democrats in 1896 broke this growing opposition.  Very soon after that, the Democrats, realizing what problems the Populist party had created, started restricting voting rights among poor whites and blacks with the creation of the poll tax, education requirements and other so-called Jim Crow regulations.

[Gustaf]

Isn't it the case though that the Democrats got the minorities and the Republicans the New England elite throughout the entire 19th century?

In the Northeast, yes. The immigrants and urban poor voted Democratic, both because of boss control and because the Republicans supported nativist policies such as prohibition. The WASP elite voted Republican because they were hungry for higher tariffs, many of them being in high industry.

However, in the rest of the country this was reversed. In the old Confederacy, the Bourbon elite were staunchly Democratic and the poorest citizens- blacks and "white trash" Unionists- voted Republican. In the West, the prosperous merchants and business leaders were quite often Democrats, while their employees- identifying with Lincoln's ideal of the common man- voted Republican.

Wow, thats pretty interesting. I had no idea that poor whites in the south and west voted Republican while the wealthier ones voted Democrat.

Gustaf- also interesting... are you sure that's the case with every presidential election though? I'm wondering on 1904, 1920, 1924,  1928, and even 1932 with prohibition and FDR's balanced budget campaign promises.

Consider the 20s Republicans ties to big business and the corruption scandals. Also look at the demise of the Progressive Repbulicans.