Who was more left-wing: Teddy Roosevelt or Grover Cleveland?

[E-Dawg]

And for a bonus questions, how would the two of them voted in elections after their deaths?

[Republican Party Stalwart]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considered voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. If anything, this would suggest that Teddy's position on any "left-right" political spectrum lied somewhere in between that of Cleveland and that of the Republican Party's contemporary establishment/base/corpus.

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

[E-Dawg]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considering voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. (If anything, this would suggest that Teddy lied between Cleveland and the Republican Party's corpus on any "left-right" political spectrum.)

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

Maybe he secretly did vote for Cleveland when he actually voted then.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We have to understand these people in context.

Cleveland was the last classical liberal to hold office as President. The reason many tend to mislabel him as a conservative, or want to portray him as one, is because liberalism was already transitioning in the late 19th century. This is the period in which the notion of "classical liberalism" were developed to differentiate from the "New/Modern Liberals". The term social liberalism was also used to refer to the latter group but carried a different meaning from that of today, as it referred mainly to "reforms to help the lower social classes", rather than to the "social issues" that we refer to today as such.

Even as a classical liberal, Cleveland still supported reforms and opposed speculators and corruption and the like, he just had a different philosophy about how to reign them in.

TR was certainly not pleased with the 1884 nominee and a lot of reform minded Republicans jumped ship that year. That said I do recall some tensions between TR and Cleveland from Cleveland's time as Governor.

[Republican Party Stalwart]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considering voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. (If anything, this would suggest that Teddy lied between Cleveland and the Republican Party's corpus on any "left-right" political spectrum.)

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

Maybe he secretly did vote for Cleveland when he actually voted then.

Maybe, although the secret ballot wasn't universally implemented in POTUS elections until after 1888 IIRC.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considering voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. (If anything, this would suggest that Teddy lied between Cleveland and the Republican Party's corpus on any "left-right" political spectrum.)

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

Maybe he secretly did vote for Cleveland when he actually voted then.

Maybe, although the secret ballot wasn't universally implemented in POTUS elections until after 1888 IIRC.

I am not exactly sure of the time frame, but I think it was in reaction to some of the actions that took place in one of those elections.

Prior to that you just slipped sheets of paper into the ballot box with the candidates printed on it, and many times the paper ballots were color differentiated, making it rather obvious who you voted for.

This was a factor in the voter intimidation and suppression that occurred in the 1870s as well.

[E-Dawg]

We have to understand these people in context.

Cleveland was the last classical liberal to hold office as President. The reason many tend to mislabel him as a conservative, or want to portray him as one, is because liberalism was already transitioning in the late 19th century. This is the period in which the notion of "classical liberalism" were developed to differentiate from the "New/Modern Liberals". The term social liberalism was also used to refer to the latter group but carried a different meaning from that of today, as it referred mainly to "reforms to help the lower social classes", rather than to the "social issues" that we refer to today as such.

Even as a classical liberal, Cleveland still supported reforms and opposed speculators and corruption and the like, he just had a different philosophy about how to reign them in.

TR was certainly not pleased with the 1884 nominee and a lot of reform minded Republicans jumped ship that year. That said I do recall some tensions between TR and Cleveland from Cleveland's time as Governor.

Do you believe that Cleveland would have remained a Democrat into the FDR era, or that he would have voted Republican by that point? After all, John W. Davis and Al Smith turned against FDR by 1936.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considering voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. (If anything, this would suggest that Teddy lied between Cleveland and the Republican Party's corpus on any "left-right" political spectrum.)

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

Maybe he secretly did vote for Cleveland when he actually voted then.

Maybe, although the secret ballot wasn't universally implemented in POTUS elections until after 1888 IIRC.

I am not exactly sure of the time frame, but I think it was in reaction to some of the actions that took place in one of those elections.

Prior to that you just slipped sheets of paper into the ballot box with the candidates printed on it, and many times the paper ballots were color differentiated, making it rather obvious who you voted for.

This was a factor in the voter intimidation and suppression that occurred in the 1870s as well.

Jim Crow wasn't just about Separate but equal it was about Chain Gangs no Public Defender or Miranda rights until 1960 1789/1865 slavery and Chain Gangs 1865/1955 since most blks were in the S until 1948 where blks moved to LA, SF and NY, Chi they were put into prison by Dixiecrats judges for whistling at white females that's why Emmif Till was lynched he was too young for jail

Since Grover Cleveland he appointed Melville's Fuller to SCOTUS whom affirmed Separate but Equal he was more Conserv but a Dixiecrats Conserv not R Conserv, Jim Justice was a Robert Byrd Dixiecrat in 2016 and turned R in 2019


You put Populist in front of  Dixiecrats no Judicial Review Judicial Restraint but compassionate Conserv in front of R for Judicial Review

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We have to understand these people in context.

Cleveland was the last classical liberal to hold office as President. The reason many tend to mislabel him as a conservative, or want to portray him as one, is because liberalism was already transitioning in the late 19th century. This is the period in which the notion of "classical liberalism" were developed to differentiate from the "New/Modern Liberals". The term social liberalism was also used to refer to the latter group but carried a different meaning from that of today, as it referred mainly to "reforms to help the lower social classes", rather than to the "social issues" that we refer to today as such.

Even as a classical liberal, Cleveland still supported reforms and opposed speculators and corruption and the like, he just had a different philosophy about how to reign them in.

TR was certainly not pleased with the 1884 nominee and a lot of reform minded Republicans jumped ship that year. That said I do recall some tensions between TR and Cleveland from Cleveland's time as Governor.

Do you believe that Cleveland would have remained a Democrat into the FDR era, or that he would have voted Republican by that point? After all, John W. Davis and Al Smith turned against FDR by 1936.

I think it is rather likely that Cleveland would have followed Smith yes.

Many "classical liberals" who preferred not to "modernize" took that path, eventually. Though certainly not all at once and the traditions of the Democratic Party, appeals to state's rights and "party of the common man" and Jefferson-Jackson legacy, did much to keep many from bolting all at once.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considering voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. (If anything, this would suggest that Teddy lied between Cleveland and the Republican Party's corpus on any "left-right" political spectrum.)

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

Maybe he secretly did vote for Cleveland when he actually voted then.

Maybe, although the secret ballot wasn't universally implemented in POTUS elections until after 1888 IIRC.

I am not exactly sure of the time frame, but I think it was in reaction to some of the actions that took place in one of those elections.

Prior to that you just slipped sheets of paper into the ballot box with the candidates printed on it, and many times the paper ballots were color differentiated, making it rather obvious who you voted for.

This was a factor in the voter intimidation and suppression that occurred in the 1870s as well.

Jim Crow wasn't just about Separate but equal it was about Chain Gangs no Public Defender or Miranda rights until 1960 1789/1865 slavery and Chain Gangs 1865/1955 since most blks were in the S until 1948 where blks moved to LA, SF and NY, Chi they were put into prison by Dixiecrats judges for whistling at white females that's why Emmif Till was lynched he was too young for jail

Since Grover Cleveland he appointed Melville's Fuller to SCOTUS whom affirmed Separate but Equal he was more Conserv but a Dixiecrats Conserv not R Conserv, Jim Justice was a Robert Byrd Dixiecrat in 2016 and turned R in 2019


You put Populist in front of  Dixiecrats no Judicial Review Judicial Restraint but compassionate Conserv in front of R for Judicial Review

This thread was not about all the ins and outs of segregation and just because something isn't mentioned by necessity of being focused, doesn't mean it isn't known or isn't being considered.

The topic of the voting process came up, and it was relevant to mention an extra level of problematic that this system and process facilitated at the time.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considering voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. (If anything, this would suggest that Teddy lied between Cleveland and the Republican Party's corpus on any "left-right" political spectrum.)

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

Maybe he secretly did vote for Cleveland when he actually voted then.

Maybe, although the secret ballot wasn't universally implemented in POTUS elections until after 1888 IIRC.

I am not exactly sure of the time frame, but I think it was in reaction to some of the actions that took place in one of those elections.

Prior to that you just slipped sheets of paper into the ballot box with the candidates printed on it, and many times the paper ballots were color differentiated, making it rather obvious who you voted for.

This was a factor in the voter intimidation and suppression that occurred in the 1870s as well.

Jim Crow wasn't just about Separate but equal it was about Chain Gangs no Public Defender or Miranda rights until 1960 1789/1865 slavery and Chain Gangs 1865/1955 since most blks were in the S until 1948 where blks moved to LA, SF and NY, Chi they were put into prison by Dixiecrats judges for whistling at white females that's why Emmif Till was lynched he was too young for jail

Since Grover Cleveland he appointed Melville's Fuller to SCOTUS whom affirmed Separate but Equal he was more Conserv but a Dixiecrats Conserv not R Conserv, Jim Justice was a Robert Byrd Dixiecrat in 2016 and turned R in 2019


You put Populist in front of  Dixiecrats no Judicial Review Judicial Restraint but compassionate Conserv in front of R for Judicial Review

This thread was not about all the ins and outs of segregation and just because something isn't mentioned by necessity of being focused, doesn't mean it isn't known or isn't being considered.

The topic of the voting process came up, and it was relevant to mention an extra level of problematic that this system and process facilitated at the time.

I just wanted to remind you why do you think Rs overperformrned prior to Trump Era 20. McCain ran in 2000/2004 on McCain and Feingold and was on the ballot with Bush W in 2004/2016 with Trump it's no question Chris Shays, John McCain and Rob Simmons in H and S had Moderate Rs in place that's why the kept the H 12 yrs 1994/2006 and 2011/2018 and won the Prez 2000/2004/2016


Justice ALITO altered McCain Feingold im 2010,0with Citizens United in 2010 that's why Rs won again in 2011

McCain lost to Obama because he picked Maga Palin whom endorsed Maga Trump, when McCain died and Rs could not long win AZ because Compassionate Conserv John McCain died that went the R majority

We lost 3 liberal lions JFK, Bobby and Teddy Kennedy and the Reagan Revolution came and if Teddy Kennedy wouldn't have died Brown wouldn't have won MA

McCain was a compassionate Conserv due to he was pro EPA like Nixon was no oil drillingg on Fed land only on continental shelf due to Wildfires in AZ, what was Teddy Roosevelt he was an Environmentalist

The Rs can't win the Prez without AZ because it's 10 EC votes that make up WI and GA makes up 16 votes for PA wave insurance

And YOUNGKIN has fallen Rs were ahead of Biden in VA but in POS polls they are now behind Biden in VA

Not mention the trouble Rs are in FL, NC, OH and TX. Allred, Kunce, Brown, Tester and GALLEGO have better Approvals than Rosedale, Lake, Dolen, Hawley and Cruz


The only one that has net positive Approvals are Scott and Jim Justice in red states Hawley and Cruz are stuck at 45 why they are Maga Jim Talent and Roy Blunt weren't Maga


Users  think that DeSantis and Trump are gonna win, no they won't because McCain held up the R party from being Maga he died in 2018 it's fully maga now since J6 since Don Jr is in Sean Hannity taken the reigns of Rs it makes it worse for Rs not better Don Jr doesn't appeal to blks they aren't winning WI, PAvand MI with 9% of the blk vote you need 20% as an R like Bush H winning 1988 Trump won them on Gary Johnson split vote only in 2016 with McCain

That's why Rs just lost WI by 11 in judge race and PA state legislature special Edays

cc KS Eisenhower beat S Stevenson
cc CA Nixon beat HHH not Humphrey
cc MI Ford
cc AZ McCain
cc CT Shays.
cc NH Judd Gregg
cc CA Schwarzenegger beat S Davis
cc PA Specter

All predated died or  retired before J,6 2020

Kerry was overperformrned Bush W, Gore almost won FL and Hillary almost beat Trump why  because McCain was on the AZ ballot in AZ 2004/2016 and Kerry was winning but Bush W came back after Reagan funeral because he had Edwards not gravitas Wes Clark or Gephardt , that's why Obama picked Biden not Evan Bayh gravitas

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Something that is both very interesting and very pertinent to his topic, is that Theodore Roosevelt (who at that point in time was just as unambiguously to the left of the median Republican politician as he was both before and after that point in time) strongly considering voting for Cleveland in 1884, but decided against it only so that he would more likely be able to climb the ranks of the Republican Party in his career afterwards. (If anything, this would suggest that Teddy lied between Cleveland and the Republican Party's corpus on any "left-right" political spectrum.)

Also, Teddy was unambiguously more "imperialist" and less liberal-internationalist than Cleveland.

TR and Cleveland, IIRC, got along fairly well when the former was a state senator during the latter's governorship. They eventually had a falling out over Cleveland's refusal to break a gov't contract that was found to be wasteful (an issue of honoring commitments vs the state's duties to its taxpayers, if you will).

[Vice President Christian Man]

I think Cleveland or McKinley would be a more apt. comparison but interestingly enough I read somewhere that Cleveland supported Abraham Lincoln although I couldn't find it anywhere and it wouldn't have surprised me if he voted Rep in his last few elections as well. Roosevelt is further left-wing, although I can't think of a notable modern day counterpart, maybe Churchill but he's not that modern. Cleveland on the other hand would've fit well in the libertarian wing of the GOP.

[TransfemmeGoreVidal]

TR, no question he was more progressive then Groomer Cleveland.

[Republican Party Stalwart]

TR, no question he was more progressive then Groomer Cleveland.

Notwithstanding the fact that being "comparatively more progressive" (depending on the definition of "progressivism" being used) does not necessarily indicate being "comparatively left-leaning" - in fact, the "big-P 'Progressivism'" in America of the period between Reconstruction and World War I would strongly imply neither "more left-leaning" nor "more right-leaning," if anything - even the claim that TR was "more progressive" (even if "progressive" is defined here as the "Progressivism" of that time) is itself dubious. Cleveland's "anti-corruption" and Free Trade tendencies were indeed a very crucial aspect of the contemporary "Progressive" movement, and the phenomenon of the "Mugwump" faction (to which TR himself belonged if only in sympathy) is a manifestation of this.

[Skill and Chance]

TR, no question he was more progressive then Groomer Cleveland.

Notwithstanding the fact that being "comparatively more progressive" (depending on the definition of "progressivism" being used) does not necessarily indicate being "comparatively left-leaning" - in fact, the "big-P 'Progressivism'" in America of the period between Reconstruction and World War I would strongly imply neither "more left-leaning" or "more right-leaning," if anything - not even the claim that TR was "more progressive" (even if "progressive" is defined here as the "Progressivism" of that time) is doubtful. Cleveland's "anti-corruption" and Free Trade tendencies were indeed a very crucial aspect of the contemporary "Progressive" movement, and the phenomenon of the "Mugwump" faction (to which TR himself belonged if only in sympathy) is a manifestation of this.

Yes, Progressivism back then was at least partly about the early middle class flexing it's muscles for the first time and it isn't a 1-to-1 comparison with progressivism today.

[RINO Tom]

TR, no question he was more progressive then Groomer Cleveland.

Notwithstanding the fact that being "comparatively more progressive" (depending on the definition of "progressivism" being used) does not necessarily indicate being "comparatively left-leaning" - in fact, the "big-P 'Progressivism'" in America of the period between Reconstruction and World War I would strongly imply neither "more left-leaning" or "more right-leaning," if anything - not even the claim that TR was "more progressive" (even if "progressive" is defined here as the "Progressivism" of that time) is doubtful. Cleveland's "anti-corruption" and Free Trade tendencies were indeed a very crucial aspect of the contemporary "Progressive" movement, and the phenomenon of the "Mugwump" faction (to which TR himself belonged if only in sympathy) is a manifestation of this.

Yes, Progressivism back then was at least partly about the early middle class flexing it's muscles for the first time and it isn't a 1-to-1 comparison with progressivism today.

This is one of my biggest issues with people - especially partisan Democrats - trying to apply our modern labels back to political figures of the past.  They treat "progressive" and "conservative/right wing" as two obvious, inherent dichotomies ... fine, whatever.  However, they CHANGE the definition of what "conservative" means when looking at past figures to the point where they end up labeling objectively left-leaning people as "conservatives" if they have one reactionary or objectionable stance (i.e., saying Wilson was anything other than a left winger because he was really racist and supported segregation), but then they will simultaneously apply our weird, narrow, modern definition of "progressive" toward ALL past figures who helped promote any kind of modern change, as if whatever the hell the Squad represents today is just an extreme version of the ideological descendants of frickin' Lincoln, lol.

[Republican Party Stalwart]

TR, no question he was more progressive then Groomer Cleveland.

Notwithstanding the fact that being "comparatively more progressive" (depending on the definition of "progressivism" being used) does not necessarily indicate being "comparatively left-leaning" - in fact, the "big-P 'Progressivism'" in America of the period between Reconstruction and World War I would strongly imply neither "more left-leaning" or "more right-leaning," if anything - not even the claim that TR was "more progressive" (even if "progressive" is defined here as the "Progressivism" of that time) is doubtful. Cleveland's "anti-corruption" and Free Trade tendencies were indeed a very crucial aspect of the contemporary "Progressive" movement, and the phenomenon of the "Mugwump" faction (to which TR himself belonged if only in sympathy) is a manifestation of this.

Yes, Progressivism back then was at least partly about the early middle class flexing it's muscles for the first time and it isn't a 1-to-1 comparison with progressivism today.

This is one of my biggest issues with people - especially partisan Democrats - trying to apply our modern labels back to political figures of the past.  They treat "progressive" and "conservative/right wing" as two obvious, inherent dichotomies ... fine, whatever.  However, they CHANGE the definition of what "conservative" means when looking at past figures to the point where they end up labeling objectively left-leaning people as "conservatives" if they have one reactionary or objectionable stance (i.e., saying Wilson was anything other than a left winger because he was really racist and supported segregation), but then they will simultaneously apply our weird, narrow, modern definition of "progressive" toward ALL past figures who helped promote any kind of modern change, as if whatever the hell the Squad represents today is just an extreme version of the ideological descendants of frickin' Lincoln, lol.

Yes, something else is that they will take whatever nugget they can of historical evidence which at first glance seems to support their hypotheses - for example, of the word "conservative" being used to refer to opponents of the Radical Republicans or of aspects of Radical Reconstruction in some certain instances of contemporary discourse - and blow it extremely out of proportion. Referring to the aforementioned example, before the Gilded Age and Progressive Era - and the associated increased synchronization between American and British/European public news, literature, media, information, and discourse - the word "conservative" was frequently used ad-hoc, in the "small-c" and dictionary-definition meaning, to refer to opposition to a particular change or set of changes (in society, politics, or elsewhere) in general, specifically when in contexts pertaining to that particular change or set of changes.

[E-Dawg]

Cleveland's "anti-corruption" and Free Trade tendencies were indeed a very crucial aspect of the contemporary "Progressive" movement

In what sense was Teddy Roosevelt less "anti-corruption" than Cleveland? How did that manifest in policy between the two of them? Also, outside of tariffs, in what sense was Roosevelt more economically right wing than Cleveland?

[Sumner 1868]

The disappearance of HenryWallaceVP has been an intellectual disaster for this forum.

[Republican Party Stalwart]

The disappearance of HenryWallaceVP has been an intellectual disaster for this forum.

You misspelled "godsend."

[Republican Party Stalwart]

Cleveland's "anti-corruption" and Free Trade tendencies were indeed a very crucial aspect of the contemporary "Progressive" movement

In what sense was Teddy Roosevelt less "anti-corruption" than Cleveland? How did that manifest in policy between the two of them? Also, outside of tariffs, in what sense was Roosevelt more economically right wing than Cleveland?

TR openly disliked "muckraker" investigative journalism against big business; it was actually Teddy himself who coined the term "muckraker," which he intended as a term of derision. Teddy was opposed to William Howard Taft's busting of the US Steel trust during Taft's presidency, and Teddy's opposition to that trust-bust was, ironically, one of the reasons why Teddy left Taft to form the Bull Moose Party in the first place - not only because of Teddy's pro-"good trust" ideology, but also because of Teddy's personal stake in the US Steel trust and the conflict of interest that created.

[RINO Tom]

The disappearance of HenryWallaceVP has been an intellectual disaster for this forum.

I admit he was a very interesting perspective, and I learned a number of things from him (even if I did not end up agreeing with him once I researched it further).  However, there was not one instance where his basic "thesis" on this topic was not adequately refuted by NC Yankee or others.  Not one.