How would William Jennings Bryan vote in the 2020 election?

[Ragnaroni]

I wonder how? We can turn this into the thread on "how X politican from Y era will vote in 2020".

My guess : he'd not vote out of horror.

[RINO Tom]

All of these questions rely on one big question ... would this person retain absolutely static cultural and political views for his/her entire life, across multiple decades?  I guess some people do, but imagine an alternate world where Bill Clinton died in the late 1980s ... I imagine a lot of people would argue he might not have supported Obama or Biden, but he obviously did in real life.  His views changed with his party, because he probably had a stronger attachment to his overarching ideology than to specific stances of his ... he ran with a Confederate flag on his campaign posters in 1992, and he would not have in 2020 if he were running.  That doesn't mean HE changed all that much.

As for WJB, I would argue the issue most true to "who he was" as a politician is the opposition to what he saw as business excess and income inequality.  I'm sure he'd crow about Democrats becoming too culturally liberal, but would that be enough to make him line up with Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy and even Donald Trump?  I'm doubtful, and I would say he'd vote for Biden after supporting someone else in the primaries.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

His rural populism is pretty similar to the anti establishment parts of trump's message and I think that has the best claim to his political legacy.

[SWE]

I don't think the thought of voting for Trump would ever even enter his mind as an option. From WJB's perspective, Trump would have been among the most unsavory options ever nominated by the two parties

[Vice President Christian Man]

Trump probably, I can't see how he would stomach someone with progressive social views. Although I could see him voting Green as well as they tend to deprioritize social views compared to the Dems and Trump's economic views would've greatly contrasted compared to his. I think that Gore  would've likely been the last Democratic presidential candidate he would've supported because I couldn't see him supporting a Catholic or a black man given the cultural differences between now and then.

[TDAS04]

Definitely not Trump. Bryan’s economic populism would have been strong enough to trump any social or cultural sensibilities, and Bryan would not have been impressed by a billionaire claiming to have all the answers.

[Fuzzy Bear]

He'd have run as a Democrat, given the Democrat a perfunctory endorsement, then do nothing to enable the Democrat to win.

[OSR stands with Israel]

AOC is the WJB of today

[Alben Barkley]

I don't think the thought of voting for Trump would ever even enter his mind as an option. From WJB's perspective, Trump would have been among the most unsavory options ever nominated by the two parties

You'd think so, but then again I'd have thought the same of a lot of evangelical Christians who are today Trump's most rabid supporters. The mental gymnastics they use to justify their hypocrisy to themselves are really something. Combine that with Trump's economic populism (however phony it may be, and however far removed it is in many ways from Bryan's economic populism), and it's not impossible for me to see Bryan supporting Trump.

I'd like to agree with you, and I could believe that Bryan would be among the minority of principled evangelical Christians who refused to join Trump's cult. He could just as easily be out there railing against Trump as a false prophet if not the antichrist as he could be a member of the cult himself. But in any case I have a hard time seeing him supporting Biden (a papist!) or the modern Democratic Party due to social issues alone. If we follow his two most defining traits -- devout evangelical Christianity and economic populism -- and see how people who share those traits vote today, the odds simply point to him being more likely than not a Trump voter. That does, of course, not take into account Bryan's unique individual qualities and personality, which is why I say it's still quite possible he wouldn't support Trump. But it can't be ruled out either.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

WJB would be very critical of the Democrats' liberal positions on social issues, but would he vote for Donald Trump? I don't think so. He would also be living in an America, in a Western world, where religion has simply lost influence in public life. There is no temperance movement. Recreational marijuana is definitely something WJB wouldn't be with the public on.-And he'd definitely have a word or two about LGBT people that would raise some eyebrows. But anyone who was born in the 19th century would experience a huge culture shock for obvious reasons.                     

He wouldn't vote for snake oil salesmen like Trump or DeSantis and he certainly would've endorsed the candidate whose economic philosophy aligns with his. That would likely be Sanders or Warren, and he'd probably endorse Sanders simply because he never made idpol a big deal until his dumb advisers told him to in 2020.

But WJB would ultimately side with the Democrats today and remain in the party. He would certainly prefer the economic policies Democrats support now over the policies they supported in the '90s. He would have been a frequent Clinton critic.

[7,052,770]

It depends if we're talking about him just snapping back to life, or somehow still being alive all this time.

If he's just 160 years old and has lived through the last 100 years, I think he would have stayed a Democrat the whole time and adjusted his social views accordingly. But if 1925 Bryan were reanimated in November 2020, yeah, he's going to have no concept of anything going on. I think he would have a strong dislike for Trump still though.

[RINO Tom]

It depends if we're talking about him just snapping back to life, or somehow still being alive all this time.

If he's just 160 years old and has lived through the last 100 years, I think he would have stayed a Democrat the whole time and adjusted his social views accordingly. But if 1925 Bryan were reanimated in November 2020, yeah, he's going to have no concept of anything going on. I think he would have a strong dislike for Trump still though.

This is a great answer, and your first question is an absolute must for these hypotheticals, IMO.  Look no further than Bill Clinton, who was campaigning for President as a Democrat with a Confederate flag prominently displayed in 1992 and pretty much just tows the party line on social/cultural issues in 2023 ... "being a Democrat," it turns out, was a stronger aspect of his personality than anything to do with the Confederate flag, that flag was just simply more associated with a Democrat from Arkansas without controversy in 1992 than it is now.

On that same note, being a fundamentalist Christian from a rural area wasn't some no-go for WJB as a Democrat when he was alive, and it's not like part of his campaign against his Republican opponents had to do with his "socially conservative" views; he was very clearly focused on income inequality and proper (in his mind) regulation of corporations.  As you said, I think there is a bit more of a discussion to be had if a man of his era was just plopped down into 2020 and heard about things like transgender rights and whatnot for the first time, but I have little doubt that if he simply lived through each decade and never died, his economic views would remain the most important part of his philosophy.  And I think that would mean he's still a Democrat.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

It depends if we're talking about him just snapping back to life, or somehow still being alive all this time.

If he's just 160 years old and has lived through the last 100 years, I think he would have stayed a Democrat the whole time and adjusted his social views accordingly. But if 1925 Bryan were reanimated in November 2020, yeah, he's going to have no concept of anything going on. I think he would have a strong dislike for Trump still though.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I feel like he might vote 3rd party. Gore is the last major party nominee I'm pretty sure he'd vote for.

[Alben Barkley]

It depends if we're talking about him just snapping back to life, or somehow still being alive all this time.

If he's just 160 years old and has lived through the last 100 years, I think he would have stayed a Democrat the whole time and adjusted his social views accordingly. But if 1925 Bryan were reanimated in November 2020, yeah, he's going to have no concept of anything going on. I think he would have a strong dislike for Trump still though.

This is a great answer, and your first question is an absolute must for these hypotheticals, IMO.  Look no further than Bill Clinton, who was campaigning for President as a Democrat with a Confederate flag prominently displayed in 1992 and pretty much just tows the party line on social/cultural issues in 2023 ... "being a Democrat," it turns out, was a stronger aspect of his personality than anything to do with the Confederate flag, that flag was just simply more associated with a Democrat from Arkansas without controversy in 1992 than it is now.

On that same note, being a fundamentalist Christian from a rural area wasn't some no-go for WJB as a Democrat when he was alive, and it's not like part of his campaign against his Republican opponents had to do with his "socially conservative" views; he was very clearly focused on income inequality and proper (in his mind) regulation of corporations.  As you said, I think there is a bit more of a discussion to be had if a man of his era was just plopped down into 2020 and heard about things like transgender rights and whatnot for the first time, but I have little doubt that if he simply lived through each decade and never died, his economic views would remain the most important part of his philosophy.  And I think that would mean he's still a Democrat.

The bolded is false. Some ostensible supporters unaffiliated with the Clinton and even Obama campaigns produced buttons with the Confederate flag, but they were never endorsed or produced by these campaigns.

This undermines a key part of your argument, frankly. I really don’t think Bill Clinton has changed all that much in 30 years.

[Senator Incitatus]

Anyone assuming Bryan would be a party loyalist is forgetting that he was a rebel within his party who rose to power on a wave of anti-capitalist, anti-globalist fervor. His campaigns were in some ways self-contradictory, and he would be pretty much impossible to predict, I think. Maybe he'd even start his own party.

[PickleMan]

In my mind it's possible, though unlikely, that he'd begrudgingly vote Biden due to economic policy, but his social conservatism and rural-oriented populism would be a horrible fit for today's Democratic Party. So he most likely wouldn't vote.

[The Mikado]

If nothing else, he'd have about 10 seconds on hearing that both Trump and Biden were teetotalers thinking "Well at least they're both decent moral men" before hearing all the rest of the stuff.

I very much doubt he'd have much use for a New York real estate developer, but Biden wouldn't be to his liking either.

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

I don't think "socially conservative" is the best way to understand Bryan. He definitely made common cause on issues like Prohibition and the Scopes trial with forces that were straightforwardly reactionary, but there were also at least superficially progressive arguments that were current at the time for his positions on those issues, and by his own account they were a large part of what motivated him. He'd be horrified by both major candidates (after the brief moment of approval that the Mikado just mentioned), but vote unenthusiastically for Biden.

[Skill and Chance]

Hmmm.. William Jennings Bryan lived through the Spanish Flu and the public health measures used to contain it.  Did he ever comment publicly on it?  That would be a big clue for 2020.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't think the thought of voting for Trump would ever even enter his mind as an option. From WJB's perspective, Trump would have been among the most unsavory options ever nominated by the two parties

You'd think so, but then again I'd have thought the same of a lot of evangelical Christians who are today Trump's most rabid supporters. The mental gymnastics they use to justify their hypocrisy to themselves are really something. Combine that with Trump's economic populism (however phony it may be, and however far removed it is in many ways from Bryan's economic populism), and it's not impossible for me to see Bryan supporting Trump.

I'd like to agree with you, and I could believe that Bryan would be among the minority of principled evangelical Christians who refused to join Trump's cult. He could just as easily be out there railing against Trump as a false prophet if not the antichrist as he could be a member of the cult himself. But in any case I have a hard time seeing him supporting Biden (a papist!) or the modern Democratic Party due to social issues alone. If we follow his two most defining traits -- devout evangelical Christianity and economic populism -- and see how people who share those traits vote today, the odds simply point to him being more likely than not a Trump voter. That does, of course, not take into account Bryan's unique individual qualities and personality, which is why I say it's still quite possible he wouldn't support Trump. But it can't be ruled out either.

Here's what I think people always forget: WJB wasn't even an evangelical! He was a Presbyterian and his church later merged to form the Presbyterian Church USA, which is a liberal denomination. Yes it wasn't as liberal a century ago, shocker.

Not sure if that changes the answer, but worth pointing out.