Also, the Whigs couldn't apply their founding principles to new circumstances because the Whigs didn't have any founding principles. There were principled Whigs and a Whig agenda, but there was no agreed set of Whig principles. eg, the party's embarrassed incoherence on slavery.https://twitter.com/NateBell4AR/status/1152217017405100033 …
-
-
The challenge in the Trump era is preserving the things that kept the Republican Party constrained by, even inspired by, its founding principles for a century and a half. Elements like Trump were there from the start, but the party's never been led by them.
Show this thread -
Anybody who tells you that Lincoln's party would not have tolerated Know-Nothing nativists in its ranks is historically illiterate. The party forged a majority by doing literally that. Lincoln despised the Know-Nothings, but kept his mouth shut, had an ex-Know-Nothing as his AG.
Show this thread -
The early Republicans believed in the Lockean right to keep the fruits of one's own labors, & that the Founding principles applied to all Americans. They were also American nationalists, Christian moralists, & riven by ferocious internal quarrels over immigration & nativism.
Show this thread -
Lincoln was partly concern-trolling in claiming the label of "conservative," which in his era was more associated with European throne-and-altar reactionaries. But he was sincere in arguing that Burkean fealty to the tried & familiar was in the Republican bloodstream from Day 1.
Show this thread -
And Lincoln was an originalist. His critique of Dred Scott was not that Taney shouldn't have looked to original meaning in deciding who could be a citizen, but that Taney had his history wrong: black men had fought in the Revolution, voted to ratify the Constitution.
Show this thread -
But the same Republicans who were all but unanimous in wanting the 14th Amendment to overrule Dred Scott & secure citizenship to black Americans, were also divided over whether to extend that citizenship to, say, Chinese immigrants, & mostly opposed it for the Plains Indians.
Show this thread -
Grant's record on moral & religious issues reflected the Midwestern Protestant moralism of his party's culture, the tensions it created with the party's universal principles, & how that moralism sometimes dovetailed with nativism.pic.twitter.com/pZyyGBZdYr
Show this thread -
The small-businessman/self-employed-farmer/tradesman as icon, central to Lincoln's concept of a 'right to rise' in the world, runs as a straight line through the Homestead Act, McKinley, Coolidge, Reagan, even the 2012 Romney campaign's reaction to "you didn't build that."
Show this thread -
Progressivism ran its course within the GOP under TR & Taft, even re-emerged as a kind of managerial ethos (Hoover, Ike, Romney). But it never attained the kind of radicalism as in the Democratic Party of Woodrow Wilson & his heirs. TR went radical only when he left in 1912.
Show this thread -
The progressive Republicanism of the TR/Taft era, which John McCain much admired, was ultimately a small-businessman rebellion against big-business gigantism. A truly anti-business posture could not gain traction in the Republican Party of any era.
Show this thread -
I would not go that far, but the combination of pro-business & nationalist elements in the GOP have been pro-tariff at least as often as they've been pro-free-trade. The Reagan-Bush-Bush era was the high watermark of free trade in the GOP.https://twitter.com/jneeley78/status/1152226718649868289 …
Show this thread -
Another area where the GOP has had internal tensions from the outset: Lincoln was a law-and-order guy, horrified by mobs & John Brown-style vigilantes. He was like John Adams - not Sam Adams. But the libertarian, my-land-my-gun ethos was vibrant in Bleeding Kansas.
Show this thread -
Republicans were never really averse, even in Lincoln & Grant's day, to pandering to a variety of deplorable sentiments. But their inability to compete with Democrats on naked identity politics & urban machinery has likewise been a constant for generations.
Show this thread -
The continuity between the Republicans' inability to crack the D unity of white Southerners between 1850s-1920s & their inabillity to crack the D unity of African-Americans in recent decades is likewise wired into the two parties' styles of addressing identity-politics issues.
Show this thread -
"The parties flipped" is a misleading shorthand: the Democrats gradually stopped pandering to a group that was leaving the party, & started pandering to a group that was entering, while the GOP in both cases was playing catch-up. Dems didn't change tactics, just targets.
Show this thread -
Has the influx of ex-Democrats, or more typically the children of Democrats, in the South changed the Republican Party? Sure. But the sources of continuity remain. And even Trump has more in common with the Know-Nothings, John Bell, or Andrew Johnson than he does w/1850s Dems.
Show this thread -
Republican growth in the South didn't flip on a dime. It started rumbling in 1928 (Al Smith) & 1938 (Court-packing, 2d New Deal), grew organically outward from ancestral Republican sectors of VA, TN, TX, wasn't really completed until this decade. 1st GOP POTUS to crack it? Ike.
Show this thread -
Some Republicans have been more welcoming to immigration than others, some did better in the Northeast. Some immigrant groups were GOP. But broadly speaking, since the mid-19th century the Democrats & not the Rs have been the party of the big cities & recent arrivals.
Show this thread -
The fact that Democrats were simultaneously the party of big, urban machines full of immigrants *and* the party of slave plantations only makes sense once you accept the transactional rather than principled nature of the D party. The same dynamic explains Joe Biden in the 1970s.
Show this thread -
Fernando Wood, the Tammany Hall Democrat Mayor of New York, wanted NYC to secede from the Union with the slave states, & opposed the 13th Amendment. Upstate New York was full of abolitionist Republicans like William Seward; the City remained Democratic.
Show this thread -
Given the longstanding nature of each of the 2 parties, the answer today for frustrated Republicans is not to join the Democrats, who will never be the party that stands for the general interest or the classical liberal, Lockean principles of the American Founding.
Show this thread -
The answer, instead, is to stay and fight for the long, proud legacy of those principle in the Republican Party. Every great Republican leader had to accept compromises of those principles & adapt them to new times, but we can always return to them. They haven't left, even now.
Show this thread -
I have a second set of thoughts to maybe append here later, but I'll leave off here for now. Keep the faith, and never let anybody tell you it's not a faith worth keeping.
Show this thread -
So far, an hour later, this is only one Tweet, but it seems likely from the framing of the initial Tweet that it's going to completely ignore everything I actually wrote, from the broad themes to the specific examples to the numerous caveats.https://twitter.com/HC_Richardson/status/1152241043573825538 …
Show this thread -
Nearly all of the focus of "the parties switched" narrative is on the South, & there are reasons for that, but it impoverishes history to just ignore the whole rest of the country. Moreover, even the South is not a monolith. Let's look at the presidential vote in the South.
Show this thread -
I'll use R vote share rather than 2-party vote share for these purposes; both have their uses, but the challenge for Republicans for years was to get a hearing with white Southerners, even when they started abandoning Ds.
Show this thread -
"Deep South"=FL/GA/AL/MS/LA "Border South"=TX/TN/VA/AR "Border States"=MD/DE/MO/KY/WV. The two latter had mostly caught up to the nation in R vote share by Ike's time. The Border South states shifted sharply R between 1940-52.pic.twitter.com/ZAf1KS8whz
Show this thread -
The Deep South was also trending more R by the mid-1940s, but its wild swings from 1964-80 are (unlike the Border South states) more directly attributable to the Dixiecrat 3d party vote & the Southern swing back to Carter. In 1980, the Deep South was still less R than the USA.
Show this thread -
This, too, is an incomplete picture, however; you have to drill into downticket races like the House & state legislatures to see the long trajectory of Republicans breaking through with white Southerners, much of which was generational & tracked the region's economic progress.
Show this thread -
I've written at more length some years ago about the seductive oversimplicity of the "Southern Strategy" mythos, which simply assumes that there are no such thing as national security issues, economic issues, or non-racial social issues. http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2012/07/politicshistory_6.php …
Show this thread - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.