Opinion of the "Yankee Republicans"

[All Along The Watchtower]

An almost mythical, supposedly once-dominant but now, almost extinct (or are they?...) species. Known for being (again, supposedly...) "socially moderate" (or even liberal)   and "fiscally conservative." Above all, pragmatic, sensible, and prudent. Certainly a far cry from those poor, uneducated backwoods Dixiecrats and fundamentalist Christians from the South (who, of course, immediately flipped from Democrat to Republican at the same time as the rest of the country flipped-in the 1960s-from Republican to Democrat).

Always on the right side of history..which will vindicate the Yankee Republicans, in good time.

[TNF]

Freedom Fighters from 1854 to 1876, and thereafter undeniably HPs, even if a few here and there weren't as awful as the others.

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

Freedom Fighters from 1854 to 1876, and thereafter undeniably HPs, even if a few here and there weren't as awful as the others.

[Rockefeller GOP]

FF (R).

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

They're not that bad until they try to start banning crap and get obsessed with the fact that they're Republicans in the Northeast. Also, a ton of other crap I don't like. Maybe I should just make for Appalachia or get a job at an auto plant...

[Goldwater]

They're not that bad until they try to start banning crap and get obsessed with the fact that they're Republicans in the Northeast. Also, a ton of other crap I don't like. Maybe I should just make for Appalachia or get a job at an auto plant...

This pretty much sums up my view.

[Mechaman]

A most misunderstood creature, both by those who defend them and those that offend them.

[H. Ross Peron]

Far too broad of a term to classify.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Some of the biggest FFs in American history (R).

[ElectionsGuy]

HPs

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

An almost mythical, supposedly once-dominant but now, almost extinct (or are they?...) species. Known for being (again, supposedly...) "socially moderate" (or even liberal)   and "fiscally conservative." Above all, pragmatic, sensible, and prudent. Certainly a far cry from those poor, uneducated backwoods Dixiecrats and fundamentalist Christians from the South (who, of course, immediately flipped from Democrat to Republican at the same time as the rest of the country flipped-in the 1960s-from Republican to Democrat).

Always on the right side of history..which will vindicate the Yankee Republicans, in good time.

Ralph Owen Brewster was pragmatic and socially liberal?

Howard Baker was an uneducated hick?

Generalization fail.

[AggregateDemand]

Depends on whether you're talking about the politicians or the constituents. The politicians are soft, and they can't lead. The constituency holds more promise for the future of the US than the conservatives in the Deep South.

[H. Ross Peron]

Depends on whether you're talking about the politicians or the constituents. The politicians are soft, and they can't lead. The constituency holds more promise for the future of the US than the conservatives in the Deep South.

Yes like Ted Cruz, Chris McDaniel, and Paul Broun.

[Mechaman]

An almost mythical, supposedly once-dominant but now, almost extinct (or are they?...) species. Known for being (again, supposedly...) "socially moderate" (or even liberal)   and "fiscally conservative." Above all, pragmatic, sensible, and prudent. Certainly a far cry from those poor, uneducated backwoods Dixiecrats and fundamentalist Christians from the South (who, of course, immediately flipped from Democrat to Republican at the same time as the rest of the country flipped-in the 1960s-from Republican to Democrat).

Always on the right side of history..which will vindicate the Yankee Republicans, in good time.

Ralph Owen Brewster was pragmatic and socially liberal?

Howard Baker was an uneducated hick?

Generalization fail.

Based off of conversations that I had with PR and previous posts he has made on this subject lends me to suspect that he is being pretty darn sarcastic.

Really, I believe this original post is more of a mock post of how the average lazyman views American History through a certain lens, and that is the fight between virtuous non-racist pro-Civil Rights liberal Yankee WASPs from the North vs. foaming at the mouth rabid genocidal Injun killin anti-Civil Rights dog eating far right reactionary protestant hicks from the South while neglecting the multitude of other groups that also made up the political history of the nation as well as the other issues outside of race and slavery that would help people understand how/why the Left vs. Right (or I guess liberal vs. conservative would be more apt for the times) dynamics of US History pre-Civil Rights era more.  Even with a few classes of high school history and some college courses it's hard for people to understand and look past a few issues through our modern lenses to try to consider the issues.  In the process many of us also somehow manage to whitewash many issues of the time, such as why were small/limited government types considered "liberal" back in the day or how big government heavy tariff supporters were the "conservatives".  Of course this last part is more of a problem of people thinking that ideology is all about the means used and not the ends that are intended.

I believe that PR's post is an attack on historical generalizations more than anything else.

As for what I actually think about "Yankee Republicans"?  THat is far too broad of a category and could include anybody from former Know Nothing crazies of the mid 19th century to outright late 20th century liberals like John Chafee.  So yeah, not voting on principle as even ethnic and cultural demographics are subject to substantial societal change over time.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

a far cry from those poor, uneducated backwoods Dixiecrats and fundamentalist Christians from the South (who, of course, immediately flipped from Democrat to Republican at the same time as the rest of the country flipped-in the 1960s-from Republican to Democrat).

Tell that to Robert Byrd and Fritz Hollings.

[Rockefeller GOP]

a far cry from those poor, uneducated backwoods Dixiecrats and fundamentalist Christians from the South (who, of course, immediately flipped from Democrat to Republican at the same time as the rest of the country flipped-in the 1960s-from Republican to Democrat).

Tell that to Robert Byrd and Fritz Hollings.

Thankfully, he's kidding.  Read the fantastic post above yours!

[morgieb]

Far too broad of a term to classify.

[Mr. Illini]

There's a ton of these in suburban Chicago and they're generally FFs. They really dislike conservatives on social issues, they despise the birther types, and on economic issues they tend conservative but are the types that you can have a reasonable conversation with without throwing your head against the wall like you would with a southern conservative. Of all the demographics I am disagreement with, the Yankee Pubs are some of my most tolerable.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

An almost mythical, supposedly once-dominant but now, almost extinct (or are they?...) species. Known for being (again, supposedly...) "socially moderate" (or even liberal)   and "fiscally conservative." Above all, pragmatic, sensible, and prudent. Certainly a far cry from those poor, uneducated backwoods Dixiecrats and fundamentalist Christians from the South (who, of course, immediately flipped from Democrat to Republican at the same time as the rest of the country flipped-in the 1960s-from Republican to Democrat).

Always on the right side of history..which will vindicate the Yankee Republicans, in good time.

Ralph Owen Brewster was pragmatic and socially liberal?

Howard Baker was an uneducated hick?

Generalization fail.

Based off of conversations that I had with PR and previous posts he has made on this subject lends me to suspect that he is being pretty darn sarcastic.

MY sarcasm detector turns of when I get insufficient amounts of sleep.

Really, I believe this original post is more of a mock post of how the average lazyman views American History through a certain lens, and that is the fight between virtuous non-racist pro-Civil Rights liberal Yankee WASPs from the North vs. foaming at the mouth rabid genocidal Injun killin anti-Civil Rights dog eating far right reactionary protestant hicks from the South while neglecting the multitude of other groups that also made up the political history of the nation as well as the other issues outside of race and slavery that would help people understand how/why the Left vs. Right (or I guess liberal vs. conservative would be more apt for the times) dynamics of US History pre-Civil Rights era more.  Even with a few classes of high school history and some college courses it's hard for people to understand and look past a few issues through our modern lenses to try to consider the issues.  In the process many of us also somehow manage to whitewash many issues of the time, such as why were small/limited government types considered "liberal" back in the day or how big government heavy tariff supporters were the "conservatives".  Of course this last part is more of a problem of people thinking that ideology is all about the means used and not the ends that are intended.

I have been hammering that point for years. It seems that those who approach it from that perspective seem to skew as a group heavily towards Marxism or similar ideologies, which makes sense because everything is termed based on class and particularly what class benefits at which other's expense.