Question about US Election history

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Joseph
Here is one for you.
The Democrate party has been around since 1801, but has only produce 18 Presidents.

The Republican party started in 1869 or so, but has produce, guess what, also 18 Presidents.
Since the Republican has been here only 9 Democrate has made it to the White House.

The Rep. are beating the Demo 2 to 1.

Well number of candidates doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as time in control. Remember that King FDR was in charge for like 20 years (really 12, but still).

The Republicans had a bunch of forgettable Presidents in the late 1800s. I suppose most only served for one term, so I guess they gain ground that way.

[Jaguar]

Josephs statistics are a little misleading. Take a look at the early 20th century.

For the first 50 or so years of the century, control was split evenly time-wise, but I believe there were 6 Republicans: McKinley, Roosevelt, Taft, Harding, and Coolidge. The Dems had 3: Wilson, FDR, and Truman.

[OzzyKP]

Well I crunched the numbers and Dems were in control for 100 years, and Reps for 92.

I didn't count Andrew Johnson in either tally though, I'm not sure what to make of him. The Almanac said he was a Democrat who was elected Vice-President by the Republicans under some other ticket. Who knows.

But either way my theory holds, even though its only an 8 year difference.

[GePap]

Today's republican party is not the same as the party of Ike and Dewey form just 50 years ago, far less that of Lincoln. Ditto the Dems of today are not much like the Dems of 1860. I think the only things that has stayed relatively stable are Democratic strength among the immigrant classes and labor unions, and a protestant center for the Republicans.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Teddy Roosevelt's party was the Bullmoose Party

Actually Roosevelt's party was the 'Progressive Party' but was nicknamed the Bull Moose Party after Roosevelt continued a speech after he was shot, saying he was a tough as a bull moose.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Another reasonable successful 3rd-party candidate not mentioned yet was Robert LaFollette, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate in 1924. He got something like 17-18% of the popular vote and carried his home state of Wisconsin.

[uh Clem]

Perot didn't carry any states, but his overall percentage was higher than Wallace (1968) and Anderson (1980) combined.

TR's Progressive party was largely the liberal wing of the GOP. Yes, there was such a thing.

the Rep is David Duke and his running mate is Pat Robertson.

Wow. Now there's the ticket from Hell.

[Stefu]

David Duke has a nice name, though. I mean, 'Duke'. It's a name for a person born to rule. Er.

However, it still doesn't beat one of the best names for a politician (of sorts) ever - George Lincoln Rockwell. A pity he was a Nazi. In Finland, one of the best politician names ever was, IMHO, Taisto Sinisalo - who, on the other hand, was a hardcore Stalinist.

Extremists take all the best names, really.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Joseph
He was the Governor of Texas and was hit by the magic bullet that the Gov. claims to have killed JF Kennedy. I don't remember him running for President, he may have, I just don't remember it.

And the late '60s he switched parties to Republican and became a cabinet member under Nixon (sec of treasury?) ISTR he may have briefly run for Pres in 1980 or 1976, but fizzled early.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[I don't know Connly (maybe MtG does?). John Glenn is the former Senator from Ohio who was the first American in space. He's moderate left. .

I would call John Glenn moderate, period. To the eurolefties here he'd be moderate right.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
Today's republican party is not the same as the party of Ike and Dewey form just 50 years ago, far less that of Lincoln. Ditto the Dems of today are not much like the Dems of 1860. I think the only things that has stayed relatively stable are Democratic strength among the immigrant classes and labor unions, and a protestant center for the Republicans.

well the party of Ike and Dewey was also the party of Taft and Joe McCarthy. Even the party of Lincoln was also the party of Thurlow Weed, etc. The conservative strain in the GOP has been around since just after the civil war, and the alliance with industrial capital since the civil war.

American politics was transformed when the main class division ceased to be between finance capital and its southern planter allies, and unskilled Catholic immigrants on the one hand and industrial capital and its allies among northern skilled laborers and yeoman farmers on the other. which was the case in 1860 and thereafter, to the progressive era, when the growth of large financial industrial combines threatened large elements of the northern middle class, leading to the emergence of Progressive Republicanism(1900-1912) , to the emergence of organized Labor as the principle opposition to Capital, sending much of the middle class and northern farmers back to their alliance with Capital (1932-1956) to the emergence of a post-industrial society and resulting shifts (since 1960)

To put it in European terms, the GOP in the late 19thc embodied both the "National Liberal" and "Progressive? wings of the liberal movement, in uneasy combination - the Progressives, then called "mugwumps" often flirted with the Dems, who were closer to a european style conservative party - supported by Catholic and regional landholding (in the South) elements marginalized by the liberal capitalist ascendance. Unlike Europe, were the working class tended to find its own leadership in Socialist parties, for various reasons a strong independent socialist party never arose in the US, and the Progressive intellectuals took the old party of Catholics and Southerners and transformed it into a vehicle for a Progressive-Labor alliance - this is sometimes fondly called "the new deal coalition". The GOP became essentially a standard post-liberal conservative party - a coalition of Industry, farmers, and less progressive elements of the middle class.
Post-1945 the southern conservatives dropped out of the Dem coalition, but the Blacks went from the GOP to the Dems. From the '60s till today the Dems have been split between labor roots, and a progressive element more left on foreign and social policy, but deeply skeptical of the Social Democratic inclinations of blue collar dems. The GOP on the other hand has reached out to lower middle class whites, especially in the south, largely on the basis of their alliance with the fundamentalist Protestant right. The GOP is threatened by splits between a capitalist/libertarian/entrepreneurial wing and the religious wing, which split threatens the interests of the big corporate core. The Dems face the dilemma of attempting to go after the lost lower middle class elements on Social Dem grounds (the Gephardt strategy) at the expense of alienating the Progressive activists (the Dean vote)

[OzzyKP]

Sounds like a good analysis to me, Mark.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Joseph
Here is one for you.
The Democrate party has been around since 1801, but has only produce 18 Presidents.

The Republican party started in 1869 or so, but has produce, guess what, also 18 Presidents.
Since the Republican has been here only 9 Democrate has made it to the White House.

The Rep. are beating the Demo 2 to 1.

That doesn't take into account the number of one-term Republicans, as well as one removed from office, another one who wasn't elected at all (Ford, not Bush), two questionables (Hayes and Bush II), and a four-term democrat.

[OzzyKP]

Yea, I made that point above, Che.

As for actual number of years the two parties have each controled the White House, the Dems have had it for 100 years and the Reps for 92.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Yea, I made that point above, Che.

As for actual number of years the two parties have each controled the White House, the Dems have had it for 100 years and the Reps for 92.

I wasn't counting the years that they held office, just what party they belong to when elected or appointed.

Question: How many years have Demo held office after 1861 vs. Rep?