Would these individuals still be a Democrat or Republican?

[President Johnson]

If these individuals were still (or again) alive, would they still be a Democrat or Republican? They were known as liberal or conservative, but their party is now the actual opposite.

Any thoughts?

Teddy Roosevelt
John Nance Garner
Al Smith
Richard Russell
James F. Byrnes
Earl Warren
Wendell Willkie
Tom Dewey
Nelson Rockefeller

[The Mikado]

I think Willkie and Dewey might still be Republicans, and I suspect Smith would still be a Democrat. Garner wouldn't fit very comfortably into the modern Republican Party, and Richard Russell would be an awkward fit in the modern GOP as well, but I think they would be Republicans (even though they wouldn't be thrilled about it. I think Rockefeller would be a Democrat, but he certainly wouldn't be a politician. Warren would 100% be a Democrat.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The GOP in early 1900 was based on pragmatic solutions. Even Taft who was a conservative on Labour Laws was pragmatic towards African Americans. That's why Blacks in OH voted for Bush W years voted GOP because of Bob Taft.

[SWE]

Garner, Russell, and Warren would probably switch parties. Roosevelt would definitely be a Republican, but I can't imagine he'd be happy with Trump's soft rhetoric on immigration.

[President Johnson]

The GOP in early 1900 was based on pragmatic solutions. Even Taft who was a conservative on Labour Laws was pragmatic towards African Americans. That's why Blacks in OH voted for Bush W years voted GOP because of Bob Taft.

Well, don't forget that a larger share of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. LBJ's fight for it was essentially a fight against his own party and not the GOP (Goldwater was an exception with a few others).

[Lechasseur]

Theodore Roosevelt
John Nance Garner
Richard Russell
James F. Byrnes
Wendell Willkie
Thomas Dewey
Al Smith
Earl Warren
Nelson Rockefeller

[Karpatsky]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Roosevelt has very little in common with the modern Republican party. Given the time period his social views would be out of place for the Dems as well, but on economic issues he is easily left of center. If not a Democrat he'd be one of those independents who vote with the Democrats anyways.

[The Mikado]

TR was far further left in 1912 than he was as President, though. I think we're basing Roosevelt off of his Presidential tenure, not his later run.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

As for Teddy Roosevelt, he'd probably be an independent, because while his economic views were certainly quite left-wing, his social views were hard-right (which, to be fair, is to be expected for the time period).

[Mr. Smith]

The GOP in early 1900 was based on pragmatic solutions. Even Taft who was a conservative on Labour Laws was pragmatic towards African Americans. That's why Blacks in OH voted for Bush W years voted GOP because of Bob Taft.

Well, don't forget that a larger share of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. LBJ's fight for it was essentially a fight against his own party and not the GOP (Goldwater was an exception with a few others).

All of whom were from The South, which was dominated by Democrats.

It should be noted that the one Republican in The South also voted against it [and The Democrat in the same state was the lone Southerner to vote for it..mostly because Ross Bass didn't get into Tennessee in time to succeed Kefauver], and a few Republicans voted against it in The North and West [such as Norris Cotton]...Democrats outside The South were lockstep in favor of it.

[smoltchanov]

The GOP in early 1900 was based on pragmatic solutions. Even Taft who was a conservative on Labour Laws was pragmatic towards African Americans. That's why Blacks in OH voted for Bush W years voted GOP because of Bob Taft.

Well, don't forget that a larger share of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. LBJ's fight for it was essentially a fight against his own party and not the GOP (Goldwater was an exception with a few others).

All of whom were from The South, which was dominated by Democrats.

It should be noted that the one Republican in The South also voted against it [and The Democrat in the same state was the lone Southerner to vote for it..mostly because Ross Bass didn't get into Tennessee in time to succeed Kefauver], and a few Republicans voted against it in The North and West [such as Norris Cotton]...Democrats outside The South were lockstep in favor of it.

Absolutely, but Southern Democratic representatives, who voted AGAINST Civil Rights legislation, considered themselves (and were considered by the others, too) to be Democrats nevertheless at that time. It wasn't a "disqualifying position" for being party candidate (on the contrary, in the South it was a "plus" for some time from pure electoral point of view - in increased candidate's chances to be elected). No one (or almost no one) considered them to be a Republicans THEN. That view  appeared much later.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Willkie would be a Democrat, just like before 1940.

[RINO Tom]

The GOP in early 1900 was based on pragmatic solutions. Even Taft who was a conservative on Labour Laws was pragmatic towards African Americans. That's why Blacks in OH voted for Bush W years voted GOP because of Bob Taft.

Well, don't forget that a larger share of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. LBJ's fight for it was essentially a fight against his own party and not the GOP (Goldwater was an exception with a few others).

All of whom were from The South, which was dominated by Democrats.

It should be noted that the one Republican in The South also voted against it [and The Democrat in the same state was the lone Southerner to vote for it..mostly because Ross Bass didn't get into Tennessee in time to succeed Kefauver], and a few Republicans voted against it in The North and West [such as Norris Cotton]...Democrats outside The South were lockstep in favor of it.

While this is true, I have never seen how it is overly relevant.  Northern Democrats were more than happy to have those Senators in the party both before and after the CRA/VRA votes.  As the above poster said, the Democratic Party certainly wasn't making civil rights a deal breaker for being a Democrat in good standing with the national party leadership.