American politics with a revived Whig Party

[TransfemmeGoreVidal]

Say a hypothetical Whig Party re-emerged in the 2020s with roughly the same ideology of the original Whig Party and a similar voter base but translated into the closest thing to a modern equivalent. The Democratic and Republican Parties would still exist as they currently do and US politics would evolve into a three party system. How would this effect the electoral map?

[Yelnoc]

Can you talk a little more about what it would mean to be a "Whig" in 2023?

[Blow by blow, the passion dies]

The party would be a weak third-party on the level of the ASP, since pro-business protectionism and congressional dominance in lawmaking have been obsolete ideas since FDR.

[Del Tachi]

The American Whigs' base of support was mostly among the urban middle classes and Evangelicals.  They would properly re-emerge as a more conservative Republican faction to Trump's MAGA base.  A party for folks like Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Paul Ryan, etc. 

[Schiff for Senate]

The American Whigs' base of support was mostly among the urban middle classes and Evangelicals.  They would properly re-emerge as a more conservative Republican faction to Trump's MAGA base.  A party for folks like Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Paul Ryan, etc. 

But the Whigs favored a strong national government. They also opposed unnecessary wars that were waged by the White House to expand American power and influence - the same way they opposed the Mexican-American War, I could see them staunchly opposing Liz Cheney's beloved Iraq War.

One thing that's for sure is that their adversaries, the populist Jacksonian Democrats, would definitely be aligned with Trump and MAGA today. The Whigs would, as you said, be the more "establishment," educated, urbanized party, for sure. The real question is whether it would more closely align itself with the establishment wing of the GOP or with the Democrats  - because it really combined aspects of both back in its heyday.

[TransfemmeGoreVidal]

The American Whigs' base of support was mostly among the urban middle classes and Evangelicals.  They would properly re-emerge as a more conservative Republican faction to Trump's MAGA base.  A party for folks like Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Paul Ryan, etc. 

But the Whigs favored a strong national government. They also opposed unnecessary wars that were waged by the White House to expand American power and influence - the same way they opposed the Mexican-American War, I could see them staunchly opposing Liz Cheney's beloved Iraq War.

One thing that's for sure is that their adversaries, the populist Jacksonian Democrats, would definitely be aligned with Trump and MAGA today. The Whigs would, as you said, be the more "establishment," educated, urbanized party, for sure. The real question is whether it would more closely align itself with the establishment wing of the GOP or with the Democrats  - because it really combined aspects of both back in its heyday.

I don't think the Jacksonians are a 1:1 parallel to Trumpism either. Jackson opposed the electoral college for instance and they tended to be more pro-immigration. Some would be Trumpites but others would probably be more left-libertarians or Bernie types.

[Schiff for Senate]

The American Whigs' base of support was mostly among the urban middle classes and Evangelicals.  They would properly re-emerge as a more conservative Republican faction to Trump's MAGA base.  A party for folks like Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Paul Ryan, etc. 

But the Whigs favored a strong national government. They also opposed unnecessary wars that were waged by the White House to expand American power and influence - the same way they opposed the Mexican-American War, I could see them staunchly opposing Liz Cheney's beloved Iraq War.

One thing that's for sure is that their adversaries, the populist Jacksonian Democrats, would definitely be aligned with Trump and MAGA today. The Whigs would, as you said, be the more "establishment," educated, urbanized party, for sure. The real question is whether it would more closely align itself with the establishment wing of the GOP or with the Democrats  - because it really combined aspects of both back in its heyday.

I don't think the Jacksonians are a 1:1 parallel to Trumpism either. Jackson opposed the electoral college for instance and they tended to be more pro-immigration. Some would be Trumpites but others would probably be more left-libertarians or Bernie types.

Yeah, immigration is notably one of the only issues on which both parties have been more or less consistent since their founding. Yes, there were things like the Chinese Exclusion Act that received wide bipartisan support, but for the most part Democrats have been pro-immigration - earlier supporting Irish/Catholic immigrants in NYC and Boston, now known more for their support of Mexican immigrants (both legal and illegal). As for the GOP, many prominent Republicans in the Civil War era were previously Know-Nothings, and it's the GOP that's associated more with the xenophobia that was prevalent even in Washington in the early 1920s.

[TransfemmeGoreVidal]

The American Whigs' base of support was mostly among the urban middle classes and Evangelicals.  They would properly re-emerge as a more conservative Republican faction to Trump's MAGA base.  A party for folks like Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Paul Ryan, etc.  

But the Whigs favored a strong national government. They also opposed unnecessary wars that were waged by the White House to expand American power and influence - the same way they opposed the Mexican-American War, I could see them staunchly opposing Liz Cheney's beloved Iraq War.

One thing that's for sure is that their adversaries, the populist Jacksonian Democrats, would definitely be aligned with Trump and MAGA today. The Whigs would, as you said, be the more "establishment," educated, urbanized party, for sure. The real question is whether it would more closely align itself with the establishment wing of the GOP or with the Democrats  - because it really combined aspects of both back in its heyday.

I don't think the Jacksonians are a 1:1 parallel to Trumpism either. Jackson opposed the electoral college for instance and they tended to be more pro-immigration. Some would be Trumpites but others would probably be more left-libertarians or Bernie types.

Yeah, immigration is notably one of the only issues on which both parties have been more or less consistent since their founding. Yes, there were things like the Chinese Exclusion Act that received wide bipartisan support, but for the most part Democrats have been pro-immigration - earlier supporting Irish/Catholic immigrants in NYC and Boston, now known more for their support of Mexican immigrants (both legal and illegal). As for the GOP, many prominent Republicans in the Civil War era were previously Know-Nothings, and it's the GOP that's associated more with the xenophobia that was prevalent even in Washington in the early 1920s.

Agreed, I think the "populist realignment" narrative tends to overlook this and that there's also been a constant strand of Federalist-Whig-Republican xenophobic populism which goes back to the Alien and Sedition Act. In some ways modern day Trumpism has just cobbled together the worst historic elements of xenophobia and racism from both parties.

[Schiff for Senate]

The American Whigs' base of support was mostly among the urban middle classes and Evangelicals.  They would properly re-emerge as a more conservative Republican faction to Trump's MAGA base.  A party for folks like Mitt Romney, Liz Cheney, Paul Ryan, etc.  

But the Whigs favored a strong national government. They also opposed unnecessary wars that were waged by the White House to expand American power and influence - the same way they opposed the Mexican-American War, I could see them staunchly opposing Liz Cheney's beloved Iraq War.

One thing that's for sure is that their adversaries, the populist Jacksonian Democrats, would definitely be aligned with Trump and MAGA today. The Whigs would, as you said, be the more "establishment," educated, urbanized party, for sure. The real question is whether it would more closely align itself with the establishment wing of the GOP or with the Democrats  - because it really combined aspects of both back in its heyday.

I don't think the Jacksonians are a 1:1 parallel to Trumpism either. Jackson opposed the electoral college for instance and they tended to be more pro-immigration. Some would be Trumpites but others would probably be more left-libertarians or Bernie types.

Yeah, immigration is notably one of the only issues on which both parties have been more or less consistent since their founding. Yes, there were things like the Chinese Exclusion Act that received wide bipartisan support, but for the most part Democrats have been pro-immigration - earlier supporting Irish/Catholic immigrants in NYC and Boston, now known more for their support of Mexican immigrants (both legal and illegal). As for the GOP, many prominent Republicans in the Civil War era were previously Know-Nothings, and it's the GOP that's associated more with the xenophobia that was prevalent even in Washington in the early 1920s.

Agreed, I think the "populist realignment" narrative tends to overlook this and that there's also been a constant strand of Federalist-Whig-Republican xenophobic populism which goes back to the Alien and Sedition Act. In some ways modern day Trumpism has just cobbled together the worst historic elements of xenophobia and racism from both parties.

Agreed. On the whole I tend to sympathize with Federalists/Whigs, but there are undeniable elements of both that are unpalatable. The Alien & Sedition Acts were brazen violations of the First Amendment, and the Federalists (similar to the GOP today) were the party of the elite. Not to say the Democratic-Republicans were perfect by any means, but they really were the party of the working class at least when compared to Federalists...in that regard, too, the Democrats have been quite consistently pro - working class, with some hiccups (elections like 1924 when they nominated bland compromise/conservative candidates). The GOP, like the Federalists and Whigs before them, have been the party of the business interests since the 1870s (really just as soon as the Civil War ended and slavery was no longer a political issue).