When was the last election where D nominee was more right than the R?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 04:09:25 PM
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 was the last election where D nominee was more right than the R?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: When was the last election where D nominee was more right than the R?  (Read 4478 times)
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,030
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: February 21, 2019, 12:19:19 PM »

Never. On the other hand, "when was the last election where the Republican nominee was more progressive than their opponent" is a much more interesting question.

Good answer.
Logged
MATTROSE94
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,803
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -6.43

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: February 21, 2019, 04:38:44 PM »

1904 or 1924 for economic issues, either 1960 or 2000 for foreign policy, and either 1940, 1944, 1960, or 1976 for social issues.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,756


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: February 21, 2019, 08:26:41 PM »

1904 or 1924 for economic issues, either 1960 or 2000 for foreign policy, and either 1940, 1944, 1960, or 1976 for social issues.

Coolidge is probably the most Economically right wing nominee probably ever
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,691
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: February 22, 2019, 02:22:56 PM »


I assume you must be including civil rights as a left-right issue where being against civil rights initiatives is presumably the "conservative" position?  Even then, I am not sure that - during the 1912 campaign - Taft was noticeably more pro-civil rights than Wilson.  A little, sure, but he wasn't too bold, to my knowledge.  Wilson really didn't gain an "anti-civil rights" reputation until well after he was elected, no?  I remember seeing that he actually got a lot of Black newspaper endorsements in 1912.

I also see little evidence that Wilson was running to Taft's right on economic issues?  Could be wrong.

Wilson was the LEAST economically interventionist candidate. His "New Freedom" platform called for limited government. Taft busted more trusts than any other President.

Opposition to trusts was a major theme of the New Freedom platform.  The major difference with Taft on the issue was that Wilson believed that the protective tariffs that Taft supported encouraged monopoly. 
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,416


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: February 22, 2019, 05:05:50 PM »

It's hard to overstate just how far right on economic issues the federal government was in the 1920s, by both diachronic American history standards and synchronic world standards. 1924 was definitely the nadir of this (Davis would go on to be implicated in the Business Plot), but it's hard to tell whether or not Davis was more right-wing than Coolidge. If we frame race relations as a left-right issue then Davis was to Coolidge's right on that (Davis would also go on to argue the losing side in Brown v. Board of Education, and of course he was a compromise candidate emerging from a convention in which one of the factions that settled for him was the Klan). The main "social issues" in the 1920s were Prohibition, on which Davis was more liberal than Coolidge, and eugenics, which is hard to frame as a left-right issue, especially in the interwar context. So 1924 might be the answer but it's really hard to say because of just how right-wing the national environment as a whole was.
Logged
Lord Admirale
Admiral President
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,880
United States Minor Outlying Islands


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -0.70

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: February 24, 2019, 11:45:47 AM »

I always felt like Carter was more conservative than Ford.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,030
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: February 24, 2019, 11:52:52 AM »

I always felt like Carter was more conservative than Ford.

I don’t know what to say other than he wasn’t...
Logged
Lord Admirale
Admiral President
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,880
United States Minor Outlying Islands


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -0.70

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: February 24, 2019, 12:06:53 PM »

I always felt like Carter was more conservative than Ford.

I don’t know what to say other than he wasn’t...
The fact that he carried the former Confederacy? Shows he at least had conservative appeal.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,030
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: February 24, 2019, 12:39:48 PM »

I always felt like Carter was more conservative than Ford.

I don’t know what to say other than he wasn’t...
The fact that he carried the former Confederacy? Shows he at least had conservative appeal.

Not necessarily.  That 1) assumes states’ politics are static over decades and 2) assumes Carter won the most conservative Southern voters.  Was Clinton more conservative than Dole just because he won WV, Trump’s best state?
Logged
Lord Admirale
Admiral President
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,880
United States Minor Outlying Islands


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -0.70

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: February 24, 2019, 01:34:45 PM »

I always felt like Carter was more conservative than Ford.

I don’t know what to say other than he wasn’t...
The fact that he carried the former Confederacy? Shows he at least had conservative appeal.

Not necessarily.  That 1) assumes states’ politics are static over decades and 2) assumes Carter won the most conservative Southern voters.  Was Clinton more conservative than Dole just because he won WV, Trump’s best state?
No because Clinton lost most of the former Confederacy. Carter carried every single Confederate state except for Virginia.
Logged
America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS
Solid4096
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,750


Political Matrix
E: -8.88, S: -8.51

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: February 24, 2019, 06:28:00 PM »

1956
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,270
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: February 24, 2019, 07:24:35 PM »

Prior to Franklin Roosevelt's 1932 campaign, all of the Democratic presidential candidates who were not named William Jennings Bryan were by and large very conservative on economic issues and reactionary on social issues as far as they were about preserving racial hierarchy and limiting the federal government's ability to compel state governments to do anything.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,691
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: February 24, 2019, 11:40:29 PM »

I always felt like Carter was more conservative than Ford.

I don’t know what to say other than he wasn’t...
The fact that he carried the former Confederacy? Shows he at least had conservative appeal.

Yes, he had some appeal to Southern conservatives, being Southern and a "born-again" Christian. 
And yet, while Carter did well compared to other Democrats of the past 50 years, among white voters he only beat Ford in GA, AR, and probably TN.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,756


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: February 25, 2019, 12:13:28 AM »

Prior to Franklin Roosevelt's 1932 campaign, all of the Democratic presidential candidates who were not named William Jennings Bryan were by and large very conservative on economic issues and reactionary on social issues as far as they were about preserving racial hierarchy and limiting the federal government's ability to compel state governments to do anything.

Lol no Wilson was very liberal when it came to economic issues and Al Smith was considered pretty liberal for the time, and Cox was considered progressive on economic issues as well. 1896 is the turning point not 1932 and even in elections where the Democrats nominated economic conservatives like 1924 the Republican candidate was even more conservative
Logged
Wazza [INACTIVE]
Wazza1901
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,927
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: February 25, 2019, 01:46:55 AM »

Prior to Franklin Roosevelt's 1932 campaign, all of the Democratic presidential candidates who were not named William Jennings Bryan were by and large very conservative on economic issues and reactionary on social issues as far as they were about preserving racial hierarchy and limiting the federal government's ability to compel state governments to do anything.

Wilson was very conservative on economic issues....? His "New Freedom" reforms resulted in the implementation of an income tax, the creation of the federal reserve and drastically increased the power and functions of the federal government.

I also press X to doubt on James M. Cox and Al Smith, who were both considered economic progressives. Smith was anti-prohibition as well (He was a Catholic after all).
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: February 25, 2019, 05:02:44 PM »

Prior to Franklin Roosevelt's 1932 campaign, all of the Democratic presidential candidates who were not named William Jennings Bryan were by and large very conservative on economic issues and reactionary on social issues as far as they were about preserving racial hierarchy and limiting the federal government's ability to compel state governments to do anything.

Al Smith was neither of those things.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,030
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: February 25, 2019, 10:03:12 PM »

You can’t make ARGUMENTS for certain years, but the answer is MUCH closer to “never” than it is a magical “turning point” ... including 1896.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: February 25, 2019, 10:15:44 PM »

You can’t make ARGUMENTS for certain years, but the answer is MUCH closer to “never” than it is a magical “turning point” ... including 1896.

Really? Cleveland was pretty clearly to the right of Harrison in 1888/1892.
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,437
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: February 25, 2019, 10:16:36 PM »

You can’t make ARGUMENTS for certain years, but the answer is MUCH closer to “never” than it is a magical “turning point” ... including 1896.

Really? Cleveland was pretty clearly to the right of Harrison in 1888/1892.
On what issues?
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,768


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: February 26, 2019, 01:09:28 AM »

Cleveland was a hardcore free trader, while Harrison was a protectionist.

If you need something a bit more "social," Harrison stuck his neck out in support of an anti-lynching law, which Cleveland never supported.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,756


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: February 26, 2019, 01:18:38 AM »
« Edited: February 26, 2019, 01:23:24 AM by Old School Republican »

You can’t make ARGUMENTS for certain years, but the answer is MUCH closer to “never” than it is a magical “turning point” ... including 1896.

1896 though was a massive massive shift : Going from Grover Cleveland to William Jennings Bryan is a massive shift in every way possible as there was probably a bigger difference between both of them politically than there was between Lyndon Johnson and Barry Goldwater in 1964.

There really is no way Grover Cleveland stays a Democrat (assuming he is active in politics) through the Wilson years let alone the FDR ones. The Presidency since then which most resembles his is Coolidge(Who is also the only President I would argue was more right-wing than Cleveland since 1860)
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,756


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: February 26, 2019, 01:19:52 AM »

You can’t make ARGUMENTS for certain years, but the answer is MUCH closer to “never” than it is a magical “turning point” ... including 1896.

Really? Cleveland was pretty clearly to the right of Harrison in 1888/1892.
On what issues?


Cleveland was clearly more Laissez-Faire than Harrison
Logged
I spent the winter writing songs about getting better
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 113,031
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: February 26, 2019, 07:07:43 AM »

Cleveland was a hardcore free trader, while Harrison was a protectionist.

Not the best example, as that also applies to William Jennings Bryan/McKinley and FDR's elections.
Logged
TDAS04
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,541
Bhutan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: February 26, 2019, 07:29:56 AM »

The Gilded Age is tricky.  Both parties were extremely pro-business.  From a lefty point of view, one could argue that while Republicans favored aid to big business, at least Cleveland and the Democrats didn’t want to help anyone, rich or poor.

The best example of and era where the Democratic candidates were to the right of their Republican counterparts would be 1856-1868.
Logged
Wazza [INACTIVE]
Wazza1901
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,927
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: February 26, 2019, 08:19:36 AM »

I always felt like Carter was more conservative than Ford.

I don’t know what to say other than he wasn’t...
The fact that he carried the former Confederacy? Shows he at least had conservative appeal.

Yes, he had some appeal to Southern conservatives, being Southern and a "born-again" Christian. 
And yet, while Carter did well compared to other Democrats of the past 50 years, among white voters he only beat Ford in GA, AR, and probably TN.

Ford managed to still win in the white South because he performed well in Southern urban and suburban areas. His strongest performances in the south include Jefferson and Shelby counties (Birmingham metro,AL), Montgomery county (Montgomery, AL) and Mobile and Baldwin counties (Mobile metro, AL), Harris, Fort Bend and Montgomery counties (Houston metro, TX), Dallas, Tarrant, Denton, Collin and Rockwall counties (Dallas Metro, TX), Lubbock county (Lubbock, TX)), Wake county (Raleigh, NC), NOVA, Virginia beach county (Virginia Beach, VA), Hinds County and Rankin county (Jackson metro, MS), Oklahoma and Cleveland counties (Oklahoma City metro, OK), Tulsa county (Tulsa,OK), Greenville county (Greenville, SC), Lexington county (Lexington, SC), East Baton rouge parish (Baton rouge, LA), Southern and Central Florida (Orlando, Palm beach, etc.), Hamilton count (Chattanooga, TN), Knox county (Knoxville, TN), Jefferson County (Louisville, KY), etc.


Carter definitely won rural Southern whites in 76.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
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 0.06 seconds with 11 queries.