What views would the Bourbon Democrats have today?

[Thomas]

If the Bourbon Democrats were still around today, what would be there beliefs today?

[darklordoftech]

As RINO Tom would say, it depends on their motives for being Bourbon Democrats. Was their motive
to help the poor or was it libertarian principles?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The Bourbons were a faction that were brought together by the unique circumstances of their time, and they don't really make sense aside from the context of the 1890's. I think more of them ended up in the GOP though.

[Orser67]

They'd be generic, conservative Republicans who stress tax cuts, deregulation, and free trade. The key issue that set Bourbon Democrats apart was the gold standard, so they'd at least be inflation hawks today. I guess some might be Ron Paulites, but I get the feeling that most would be mainstream, conservative businesspeople. They'd have fit very well into the Romney-era Republican Party.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Grover Cleveland would have become a Republican by 1916 or 1920

[Chinggis]

A hypothetical immortal Bourbon would have voted exclusively Democratic through 1944, backed Thurmond in 1948, and voted Republican in every election since (including Nixon over Wallace in 1968).

[YE]

Walter Jones basically.

[H. Ross Peron]

A hypothetical immortal Bourbon would have voted exclusively Democratic through 1944

Why? Al Smith broke with FDR after 1932. I can see a Bourbon switching by 1940 at the latest when FDR runs for a third term.

[Chinggis]

A hypothetical immortal Bourbon would have voted exclusively Democratic through 1944

Why? Al Smith broke with FDR after 1932. I can see a Bourbon switching by 1940 at the latest when FDR runs for a third term.

You may be right. In The Emerging Republican Majority, Kevin Phillips said the richest precincts in Dallas actually voted for Landon (!) in 1936.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

My PSA that almost everyone in the late 19th/early 20th Century would be a Republican today because they would be so horrified by Democrats' views on social and moral issues and general acceptance of the sexual revolution.

[Kingpoleon]

My PSA that almost everyone in the late 19th/early 20th Century would be a Republican today because they would be so horrified by Democrats' views on social and moral issues and general acceptance of the sexual revolution.

... And open support for “miscegenation” (supported by <1% of the population until the 1970s)? You say that as if the morals of such a time were empirically better.

[darklordoftech]

I feel like "Bourbon Democrat" had a similar meaning to "neoliberal" today. Both term were used to attack moderates for selling out to Wall Street.

[Wazza [INACTIVE]]

It does depend. I agree with OSR that Cleveland would retain his laizze faire, small government views in the current day, and would either become a Republican or Independent, or would just stop endorsing Democrats and parrot the "My party left me!" talking point, and I think most of the Bourbons would follow this route.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I have often seen a lot of parallels between the Clintons and Cleveland 100 years prior.

[OSR stands with Israel]

There is a huge difference between a Democrat like Grover Cleveland and Andrew Jackson .

With Andrew Jackson while he was anti government interventionism he was also very much anti banks , and he definitely was not on the pro business side of stuff . So you could say cause of that he could be a dem today due to fact that he was anti bank and anti business would make him favor more interventionist government today.


With Grover Cleveland You just can’t cause not only was he anti government interventionism he was anti union,and very much a pro business laaize faire type of guy .

[darklordoftech]

I have often seen a lot of parallels between the Clintons and Cleveland 100 years prior.

Same, with Bryan being Bernie

[Big Abraham]

There is a huge difference between a Democrat like Grover Cleveland and Andrew Jackson .

With Andrew Jackson while he was anti government interventionism he was also very much anti banks , and he definitely was not on the pro business side of stuff . So you could say cause of that he could be a dem today due to fact that he was anti bank and anti business would make him favor more interventionist government today.


With Grover Cleveland You just can’t cause not only was he anti government interventionism he was anti union,and very much a pro business laaize faire type of guy .

Jackson was against a national bank, not against the concept of banking in general, and considering that most Democrats today tend to support America's national bank (the Federal Reserve), and it's usually the Republicans who rally against the Fed, this interpretation seems pretty dubious to me.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

My PSA that almost everyone in the late 19th/early 20th Century would be a Republican today because they would be so horrified by Democrats' views on social and moral issues and general acceptance of the sexual revolution.

Plenty of people in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries had lax views on sexual morality. It just wasn't as medically-technologically possible (especially for women) to put those views into practice as it would become later.

[darklordoftech]

My PSA that almost everyone in the late 19th/early 20th Century would be a Republican today because they would be so horrified by Democrats' views on social and moral issues and general acceptance of the sexual revolution.

Plenty of people in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries had lax views on sexual morality. It just wasn't as medically-technologically possible (especially for women) to put those views into practice as it would become later.

Also, many people are products of their time. I doubt Jefferson would advocate slavery today.

[RINO Tom]

A hypothetical immortal Bourbon would have voted exclusively Democratic through 1944

Why? Al Smith broke with FDR after 1932. I can see a Bourbon switching by 1940 at the latest when FDR runs for a third term.

You may be right. In The Emerging Republican Majority, Kevin Phillips said the richest precincts in Dallas actually voted for Landon (!) in 1936.

I could see being surprised by Landon winning any precincts in Dallas, but of the ones he could win, those are the obvious choices.

[S019]

Pro-business conservative DINOs, who would want to bring back Prohibition, basically a bunch of prohibitionist Joe Manchins

[darklordoftech]

Pro-business conservative DINOs, who would want to bring back Prohibition, basically a bunch of prohibitionist Joe Manchins

Actually, opposition to prohibition was one of the things that distinguished the Bourbon Democrats from the Dixiecrats and the Republicans. The Bourbon Democrats were got most of their support from cities while prohibition was largely driven by rural areas.