Read this article anons, it shows some amazing similarities between the last whig, Taylor, and the last republican, Trump
>Still, many Whig loyalists mistrusted Taylor. He was crude, nonpartisan, unpresidential. Ohio Senator Thomas Corwin wondered how “sleeping 40 years in the woods and cultivating moss on the calves of his legs” qualified Taylor for the presidency. The great senator and former Secretary of State Daniel Webster called Taylor “an illiterate frontier colonel who hasn’t voted for 40 years.” Webster was so contemptuous he refused backroom deals to become Taylor’s running mate (unknowingly missing a chance to become president when Taylor died during his first term). Indeed, the biographer Holman Hamilton would pronounce Taylor “one of the strangest presidential candidates in all our annals … the first serious White House contender in history without the slightest experience in any sort of civil government.”
Are Republicans the new Whigs?
Dam that pretty much sums up Trump
Politico is reaching. They consider Taylor an abject failure, and thus an apt comparison to Trump.
Taylor was a general, and reasonably decorated. He is nothing like Trump, and Trump is nothing like him.
Obama turned demos into whigs
Taylor was an accomplished and successful, if uncouth, general whose efforts in the US Mexico made him a popular, if unusual, candidate.
Stupid article.
there are several similarities, some written in the very OP I wrote
there's more, there was a #NeverTaylo wing
>“The Whig party has been overthrown by a mere personal party,” he complained in June, vowing not to campaign if the party nominated this outsider. “Can I say that in [Taylor’s] hands Whig measures will be safe and secure, when he refused to pledge himself to their support?”
and
>The nomination left many other Whigs dissatisfied. Even though the convention nominated the loyalist Millard Fillmore as vice president, many lamented that Taylor’s popularity had trumped party loyalty and principles. The party had not even drafted a platform for this undefined, unqualified leader. Horace Greeley of the New York Tribune pronounced the convention “a slaughterhouse of Whig principles.” The Jonesborough Whig did not know “which most to dispise, the vanity and insolence of Gen. Taylor, or the creeping servility” of the Whig Convention that nominated him.
+ he spoke just like Trump
>Taylor claimed he won on his own nonpartisan terms, without any promises. This victory signaled “confidence in my honesty, truthfulness and integrity never surpassed and rarely equaled [since George Washington],” Taylor boasted, 98 years before the originator of Trump-speak was born.
And he won partly because his era's Hillary was so hated
>Blessed by an even more unpopular Democratic opponent whose party suffered more from the antislavery defections than the Whigs did, Taylor won—barely.
> Taylor’s Electoral College margin of 36 was the slimmest in more than two decades.
It's like reading the NRO
>Taylor’s victory triggered an “internal struggle for the soul of the Whig party”: was it more committed to seizing power or upholding principle? Underlying that debate was also a deeper question, still pressing today, about the role of fame, popularity, celebrity, in presidential campaigning—and American political leadership.
History is just humans repeating themselves over and over again
We think all of this stuff is "new", but it's just the same shit, different century.
wonder what comes after republicans, hopefully something based
Hope not just switched from Dem to Republican when I updated my drivers license. Would be annoying
you could at least help them pick a name for the new party, which hopefully wont be Gary Johnson's Libertarians
this. Trump's autistic behavior is pushing away so many people. People liked it during the campaign, but its getting tiring. It's like watching a funny tv show that's gone on too long and got stale.
But if Republicans recovered from Dubya and the Iraq War, they'll bounce back.
demographics are not on our side tho
The Republican party was dying long before Trump showed up.
written before the election....just more bullshit written by biased nobodies
Hopefully.
This, except he was an """outsider""".
meaning the Republicans will be forced to adapt. Whether or not we like it, Im guessing an increase in outreach to Hispanics and Asians is coming to the GOP soon.
so were the whigs
both men won their elections
so two pro-welfare open-borders parties?
Yes.
I think there may be a new populist type party that Trump may run as in 2020.
The Whigs tore themselves apart over slavery and the fact that they had lackluster leadership. This is silly.
>Are Republicans the new Whigs?
No, that would be the "liberals" now. They even have a parallel of Whig History.
but that would result in a loss by splitting the votes
this is exactly what the article says tho