Does what a party was like 50 years ago matter in your voting at all?

[they don't love you like i love you]

No, I'm not exaggerating when I say it doesn't matter one iota, unless of course they had negative policies that they continue today. There are some Eastern European countries where the party I'd vote for 50 years ago was imprisoning and torturing hordes of people, spying on citizens and executing dissidents....and that really has nothing to do with the type of policies they enact today. Like none whatsoever. Caring about this in any way beyond historical curiosity is one of the dumbest things I can think of.

(Had to bring this to a forum where the moderation isn't quite as arbitrary and strict. Also feel free to resume the interesting debate on Die Linke.)

[DC Al Fine]

In the dictator/oppression sense, yes. Otherwise, No

[TNF]

No, because my name isn't OldiesFreak.

[dead0man]

No, the two big parties are plenty horrible enough now for me not to vote for them, I don't need to go fishing for reasons from 50 (or even 5) years ago.

[they don't love you like i love you]

In the dictator/oppression sense, yes. Otherwise, No

Take a look at Hungary if you assume that any such party has to be more authoritarian than the opposition today.

[DC Al Fine]

In the dictator/oppression sense, yes. Otherwise, No

Take a look at Hungary if you assume that any such party has to be more authoritarian than the opposition today.

There's a always a spoiled ballot.

[YL]

No, though I can't see it making much difference here.

I have to think more about cases like Sinn Féin, where the timescale is much less than 50 years and many of the leading figures were already around.  TBH I probably wouldn't vote for them.

[Leftbehind]

I suppose so, because if Labour had started up in 1994, I would be nowhere near as well disposed to them. However, their policies of 50+ years ago were without doubt the best enacted in the UK, and although few have survived, they still make a lot of hay with those that have (see: NHS).

[GMantis]

As I said in the previous thread, I have voted for such a party, so no.

In the dictator/oppression sense, yes. Otherwise, No

Take a look at Hungary if you assume that any such party has to be more authoritarian than the opposition today.

In fact, there is something similar going on here as well. When rightist parties are in power, they exert far greater control of the media than the left BSP, which is the successor of the Bulgarian Communist Party. And with most of the media not particularly liking the Socialists in the first place, to put it mildly, the result is that when the BSP is in power, they are under intense media scrutiny and regular criticism, while when the rightists are in power, much of the media is often slavishly pro-government. And rightists also tend to interfere more with the running of elections.

[Mechaman]

No, the two big parties are plenty horrible enough now for me not to vote for them, I don't need to go fishing for reasons from 50 (or even 5) years ago.

Greatest post I've ever seen from you.  Seriously.

[Oak Hills]

LOL, only one person voted "Yes".  I wonder who that could be...

[Kaine for Senate '18]

No, because my name isn't OldiesFreak.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

To an extent (LBJ creating Medicare makes me more likely to support Democrats), but only in a positive way, and of course my vote wouldn't change anyway. So No.

[freefair]

The Jim Crow Solid South, Civil War and Lincoln would hesitate make me hesitate before voting Democrat, but I'd still do it.

[k-onmmunist]

no, although i'll admit that part of the reason i'm a member of the labour party is due to historical reasons. that and the fact i'm a situationist entryist radical. or something.

[Icehand Gino]

Children don't have to pay for their parents crimes.

So No.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

No, because my name isn't OldiesFreak.

Hahaha

The Jim Crow Solid South, Civil War and Lincoln would hesitate make me hesitate before voting Democrat, but I'd still do it.

It's one of the reasons I'm a Republican and hopefully will never become a Democrat.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

The Jim Crow Solid South, Civil War and Lincoln would hesitate make me hesitate before voting Democrat, but I'd still do it.

It's one of the reasons I'm a Republican and hopefully will never become a Democrat.

[Zioneer]

No, because my name isn't OldiesFreak.

Hahaha

The Jim Crow Solid South, Civil War and Lincoln would hesitate make me hesitate before voting Democrat, but I'd still do it.

It's one of the reasons I'm a Republican and hopefully will never become a Democrat.

Literally nobody cares but you Oldie, even every single other Republican on this forum don't care at all.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Yes seriously, before Oldiesfreak came to this forum even other Republicans didn't bother with this. Not even krazen while he was on his "White liberals are the true racists!" thing.

[justfollowingtheelections]

It depends.  If the people with whose past actions I disagree with are still around, I might not trust them even if they claim to have changed.  The last racist Democrat is dead.  They're a completely different party now that the phrase conservative democrat has become an oxymoron.
On the other hand the current Republican party has many ignorant, racist people and even more ignorant, racist voters, which the party's leaders do nothing to isolate.

[Mechaman]

It depends.  If the people with whose past actions I disagree with are still around, I might not trust them even if they claim to have changed.  The last racist Democrat is dead.  They're a completely different party now that the phrase conservative democrat has become an oxymoron.
On the other hand the current Republican party has many ignorant, racist people and even more ignorant, racist voters, which the party's leaders do nothing to isolate.

I wouldn't go that far.

[Mechaman]

Guys don't bother.  Give Oldiesfreak a few years to mature and he'll come to realize that his current way of viewing politics is flawed.

What I mean is that eventually he'll come to realize is that he can defend his reason for being a Republican without heavily relying on what happened 150 years ago.

Right now, it's pretty much a useless struggle.  The young are stiffnecked and set in their ways.

-Mecha

[Oldiesfreak1854]

It depends.  If the people with whose past actions I disagree with are still around, I might not trust them even if they claim to have changed.  The last racist Democrat is dead.  They're a completely different party now that the phrase conservative democrat has become an oxymoron.
On the other hand the current Republican party has many ignorant, racist people and even more ignorant, racist voters, which the party's leaders do nothing to isolate.

When David Duke ran as a Republican for the Senate and governor of Louisiana, the GOP rejected him.  When he ran for the latter, the Republican Party actually ran ads attacking him for his history of racism. 
Furthermore, the racist Democrats were among the conservatives of their time.  No rational conservative nowadays would be calling for a return to slavery or segregation.  The current Democrats have plenty of ignorant, racist people and voters too; every party does. 

Guys don't bother.  Give Oldiesfreak a few years to mature and he'll come to realize that his current way of viewing politics is flawed.

What I mean is that eventually he'll come to realize is that he can defend his reason for being a Republican without heavily relying on what happened 150 years ago.

Right now, it's pretty much a useless struggle.  The young are stiffnecked and set in their ways.

-Mecha

Good point, but how many times do I have to say that that is NOT the only reason that I'm a Republican?  It is one reason, granted, but it's not the only one.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It doesn't matter to my voting. It does matter somewhat as to the extent to which I identify with the party I am voting for.