Would you have been a Democrat pre-1900?

[Zioneer]

For me, the only pre-1900 Democrat I'd vote for is WJB.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I would have supported the Democratic presidential nominee fairly consistently from 1884 onward, with a possible defection to James Weaver in 1892. I'm not sure I would have gone so far as to register with the Democrats, however; judging by the governors of the era, I would likely have been a swing voter until the 1920s or so, as each party had its share of good and bad eggs.

[Republican Michigander]

I'm sure I would have voted for Cleveland.

1800's Republicans weren't very nice to Irish Catholics, so that would have strongly influenced my vote in those days. I probably would have been a Dem with Free Soil sympathies. I'd like to think I would have voted Lincoln or Grant however.

[Famous Mortimer]

No (not a conservative)

[morgieb]

Not after like 1840. Around Reconstruction I'd have been a Republican, after that an Independent/Populist/whatever left-wing movement.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

No (not a conservative)

This post is as moronic as it is stupid. You're "(D-NY)", right? You hardly had to be conservative pre-1900 to support a Democratic candidate in New York or NYC.

[Rockefeller GOP]

No (not a conservative)

Ugh.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/04/12/abraham_lincolns_war_on_inequality_.html

Worth a read, even if you refuse to accept the article's point of view.

[Goldwater]

It's obviously hard to day for sure, but I could see myself being a Democrat from their founding up until sometime in the 1840s.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Why would so many people in this thread vote Tilden? He'd have been worse than Hayes on Reconstruction policies and would have probably turned (even more of, given that Hayes did literally nothing to prevent Democratic Party terrorists in the South) a blind eye to the imposition of Jim Crow, lynchings, and the expulsion of black legislators.

It probably has to do with the fact that they think the election was stolen from him (like they falsely believe about Al Gore in 2000.)

[OSR stands with Israel]

No (not a conservative)

Republicans were more conservative on economic issues

[SWE]

No (not a conservative)

Republicans were more conservative on economic issues

This generalization is just as absurd as WhillipsBrighton's

[DC Al Fine]

I come from a long line of WASPs, so probably not.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I'm from Virginia, so probably.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I'm not a reactionary.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I'm not a reactionary.

Neat!!

So depending on your social or fiscal impositions, would you have been a ing Democrat or a ing Republican?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Party registration per se was not so much a thing back then, was it?   

[Intell]

Democrat after Hayes ended reconstruction, first time voting democrat would be Martin Van Buren first time and James K Polk. I would revert back into being a democrat after Hayes ended reconstruction, after James K Polk, the first democrat that I would have voted for would be Hanckock in 1880,and I would continue voting democrat with the exception of 1904, 1912, 1924,1952 and 1956.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

The best way to explain it is probably that both parties had "left" and "right" wings that were stronger or weaker in different parts of the country. The Democratic Party in Nebraska undoubtedly had different views than the New York City Democrats. Today, there's much less of that going on, although undoubtedly the Vermont Republicans are a bit more "liberal" than the Oklahoma Republicans.

A left wing Democrat would be William Bryan, while Grover Cleveland was more conservative.

Henry Teller was more of a left wing Republican while William McKinley was more of a moderate or conservative, depending on who you asked.

The biggest difference between the two parties was probably the tariff issue, with slavery and nativism becoming important as well during the century.

I would have probably been a more liberal Republican at the time, from everything I've read about the period.

This Democrat quote from 1896 has not "switched" to being a Republican policy issue now.

"The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it."

-William J. Bryan, 1896

That Bryan quote sounds a lot like something I'd expect a Democrat to say now.  You could say he was the originator of class warfare within the Democratic Party.  And as for nativism, there were significant nativist elements in both major parties at that time (and incidentally, Bryan was a nativist himself.)

[jaichind]

I would be D the entire time  My first R vote would have been 1896.

[SATW]

for Cleveland

[Mr. Smith]

Short answer: Yes

[RFayette]

I come from a long line of WASPs, so probably not.

This, though I really would have been tempted by Cleveland.

[Thunderbird is the word]

With my particular ethnic makeup (1/4th Irish, half Jewish, 1/4th New England Yankee) I probably wouldn't exist so it's difficult to say. Based on my current political views though I imagine that I may have been a Thaddeus Steven type Radical Republican that grew disillusioned after the reconstruction era when it became clear that the party was more interested in defending business interests then advancing civil rights. I probably would have aligned with the Democrats after that if I lived in New York due to a dislike of Waspish moral reformers (given that I also dislike there modern day equivalents) pushing for temperance laws and trying to close down saloons though when it came down to individual candidates I would have been a swing voter, probably favoring third parties quite often.

[Frodo]

My (paternal) family were listed on the Minnesota Register sometime in the 1870s as being strong Republicans.

I can't imagine I would be any different, considering the Democratic Party of the time. 

[Crumpets]

My (paternal) family were listed on the Minnesota Register sometime in the 1870s as being strong Republicans.

I can't imagine I would be any different, considering the Democratic Party of the time. 

They actually kept track of political persuasions on the state register? And did it really use the word "strong?" I'm just curious.