What has been the consistent theme of the Democratic Party since it's founding?

[Mechaman]

Hmm, tough choice but I think I will go with option 5.

[Mr. Smith]

Option 1 or 2.

[bedstuy]

Before the 20th century, both political parties were defined by sectional, ethnic and interest group ties, rather than ideology.  So, the enterprise of finding an ideological through line is fatally flawed.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

On paper, at least, support for disadvantaged groups (although the party has picked and chosen which disadvantaged groups they can be bothered to assist).

5 Is reasonable, but it's hardly like their opponents have ever been better on the anti-Asian front

[Rockefeller GOP]

Before the 20th century, both political parties were defined by sectional, ethnic and interest group ties, rather than ideology.  So, the enterprise of finding an ideological through line is fatally flawed.

There were still basic interests both parties represented.  Hence, I'll say 1 (at least rhetorically, LOL).

[Mechaman]

Before the 20th century, both political parties were defined by sectional, ethnic and interest group ties, rather than ideology.  So, the enterprise of finding an ideological through line is fatally flawed.

Yes, but hatred of the yellow menace seems to be the one constant, regardless if it's railroad workers in the west or uneducated hicks from Michigan.

[bedstuy]

Before the 20th century, both political parties were defined by sectional, ethnic and interest group ties, rather than ideology.  So, the enterprise of finding an ideological through line is fatally flawed.

Yes, but hatred of the yellow menace seems to be the one constant, regardless if it's railroad workers in the west or uneducated hicks from Michigan.

Racism against Asians was never unique to the Democratic party.  And, it didn't really exist when the Democratic party was founded, as there were no Asians in the United States. 

What are you driving at?

[sparkey]

As xkcd wonderfully demonstrates with their chart using DW-NOMINATE, the Democrats have pretty much always voted to the left on economic issues, even though what sorts of policies constitute being to the left, how ideological the parties are, and the relative importance of economic issues have fluctuated A LOT over time. So options 1 and 2 are both reasonably true, with caveats. Between the two, option 1 is probably closer to the Democrats' historical focus.

I know it's not an option, but haven't the Democrats also been the preferred party of recent immigrants throughout their history? Has there been a time when immigrants preferred Republicans?

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Option 1 is clearly the answer. Whether or not you agree that the Democrats have consistently represented the interests of everyday Americans, this has clearly been their main talking point throughout history (and really the last connecter between the Party of Jackson and the Party of Roosevelt). Option 2 comes close, but "working class" suggests labor unions to me, and the Democrats were clearly anti-union during the Cleveland years. Option 3 isn't even partially true until 1932, and only fully true once the last of the Dixiecrats had left office in the 60s/70s. Neither party has a consistent record on civil liberties, so Option 4 doesn't work. Option 5 has been true at certain points in history, but has hardly been a constant theme from 1828 onwards.

Opposing the Republican Party and criminality. Nothing else, really.

There was no Republican Party when the Democratic Party was founded.

[Sumner 1868]

Opposing the Republican Party and criminality. Nothing else, really.

There was no Republican Party when the Democratic Party was founded.

Duly noted. Disregard.

[Mechaman]

Before the 20th century, both political parties were defined by sectional, ethnic and interest group ties, rather than ideology.  So, the enterprise of finding an ideological through line is fatally flawed.

Yes, but hatred of the yellow menace seems to be the one constant, regardless if it's railroad workers in the west or uneducated hicks from Michigan.

Racism against Asians was never unique to the Democratic party.  And, it didn't really exist when the Democratic party was founded, as there were no Asians in the United States.  

What are you driving at?

Of course not, just pointing out that it's not so fairly surprising that some forum Democrats flub their noses at conversations that bring up a war that causes millions of dead Asians because "my Medicare" or something to that effect.

It is quite telling they foam at the mouth about the death of 10,000 Native Americans in the 1830s, but not the death of more than a million innocent Asian civilians in Vietnam.

I can't believe with all of the uber obvious trolling that I had been doing on this matter for the past day and a half I had to explain it like this.

[ElectionsGuy]

Being serious here its option 1. I certainly don't think its true, but the 'common man' rhetoric definitely goes all the way back to Jackson.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Racism; first against blacks, then against Asians, and now against whites.  And racial minorities who are conservative will always be fair game for racist attacks by the left.

By extension, I would argue inequality, because they constantly play it up to win votes, and have since their founding.

[IceSpear]

Racism; first against blacks, then against Asians, and now against whites.

ayy lmao

[SATW]

Racism; first against blacks, then against Asians, and now against whites.  And racial minorities who are conservative will always be fair game for racist attacks by the left.

By extension, I would argue inequality, because they constantly play it up to win votes, and have since their founding.

I voted option 5, but this is more accurate.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The Democrats have always been about pandering to the "common man". Sometimes this manifests in good ways, such as some of LBJ's Great Society policies, but more often it winds up appealing to the worst elements

[RINO Tom]

As others have said, a vague quest to change or preserve various parts of the economic environment in a way to help out the poor and working class, which is more often than not directly in contrast with business interests.

I'll also suggest that the Democrats have usually been more morally relaxed.  The GOP seems to have always fancied itself on playing the role of moral police.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

As xkcd wonderfully demonstrates with their chart using DW-NOMINATE, the Democrats have pretty much always voted to the left on economic issues, even though what sorts of policies constitute being to the left, how ideological the parties are, and the relative importance of economic issues have fluctuated A LOT over time. So options 1 and 2 are both reasonably true, with caveats. Between the two, option 1 is probably closer to the Democrats' historical focus.

I know it's not an option, but haven't the Democrats also been the preferred party of recent immigrants throughout their history? Has there been a time when immigrants preferred Republicans?

It's a great chart, but DW-NOMINATE just measures how much distance there was between the positions (voting records) of the different parties. It doesn't measure what those positions meant in ideological terms.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

They've tended to be the more pro-immigrant party.

[sparkey]

It's a great chart, but DW-NOMINATE just measures how much distance there was between the positions (voting records) of the different parties. It doesn't measure what those positions meant in ideological terms.

Well DW-NOMINATE measures how much members of Congress vote together, but the results can be broken down into 2 dimensions, the weightier one being the first dimension, which they say "can be interpreted in most periods as government intervention in the economy or liberal-conservative in the modern era." And it turns out that the Democrats have pretty much always been on the left, hence why the xkcd graphic groups them consistently under "left-leaning parties."

Maybe this is a clearer graphic to demonstrate that, although it only goes back to 1879: http://voteview.com/images/House_and_Senate_Means_1879-2012_1.jpg

[Thunderbird is the word]

More or less Democrats have always been the party of the "common man" whereas Republicans have always been the party of the "self made man."

[NeverAgain]

Now I'd like to see the reverse for the Republicans in the audience. Option 1.

[TNF]

You forgot the most obvious one, Mechaman, and I'd argue, the most true of them all -

"We're not the Whigs/Republicans!" pretty much sums up every position ever taken by the Democratic Party, ever.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It's a great chart, but DW-NOMINATE just measures how much distance there was between the positions (voting records) of the different parties. It doesn't measure what those positions meant in ideological terms.

Well DW-NOMINATE measures how much members of Congress vote together, but the results can be broken down into 2 dimensions, the weightier one being the first dimension, which they say "can be interpreted in most periods as government intervention in the economy or liberal-conservative in the modern era." And it turns out that the Democrats have pretty much always been on the left, hence why the xkcd graphic groups them consistently under "left-leaning parties."

Maybe this is a clearer graphic to demonstrate that, although it only goes back to 1879: http://voteview.com/images/House_and_Senate_Means_1879-2012_1.jpg

The Democrats were not in favor of greater government intervention in the economy in most of the nineteenth century, as they have been in most of the 20th and 21st. The Democrats are placed on the left mainly for convenience. There is continuity in voting patterns from one Congress to the next, but it does not mean the ideology is consistent over several generations.  The fact that Farmer-Labor is placed on the right should suggest that the right-left distinction implied by the chart can't be taken at face value.