# How Would You Have Voted In the Past Redux **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 9, 2010, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603 "2010-10-09T14:24:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/1 "2010-10-09T14:24:52Z")
How would you have voted for President in past elections with hindsight? 1789: George Washington (No party) Self-evident 1792: George Washington (No party) Ditto 1796: John Adams (Federalist) Needed to have a strong President and set a precedent for a reasonably strong federal government 1800: Thomas Jefferson (Democratic-Republican) Louisiana Purchase, repeal of Alien and Sedition Acts 1804: Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (Federalist) Protest vote against suicidal policy of preparing for war against Britain 1808: Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (Federalist) Ditto 1812: DeWitt Clinton (Federalist) Ditto 1816: James Monroe (Democratic-Republican) Monroe Doctrine, no real opposition 1820: James Monroe (Democratic-Republican) Ditto 1824: John Quincy Adams (Democratic-Republican) A reasonable politician who’d promote internal development and industry and who was anti-slavery in sentiment is better any day over a slave-owning, ethnic-cleansing hero of the rabble 1828: John Quincy Adams (National Republican) Ditto 1832: Henry Clay (National Republican) Ditto 1836: William Henry Harrison (Whig) Whigs offered the best policy of internal development and industry 1840: William Henry Harrison (Whig) Ditto 1844: James Knox Polk (Democratic) One of the greatest Presidents America had by massively expanding its territory setting its stage for becoming a superpower. This wouldn’t have happened with Clay in office. 1848: Lewis Cass (Democratic) Zachary Taylor’s better than Cass (more antislavery) but Taylor would die in office and we ended up having Fillmore. 1852: Winfield Scott (Whig) Would have avoided Pierce’s idiotic policy in the Kansas-Nebraska Act 1856: John Charles Fremont (Republican) Would have prevented Southern secession and the Civil War 1860: Abraham Lincoln (Republican) Preserved the Union! 1864: Abraham Lincoln (National Union) Ditto 1868: Ulysses Simpson Grant (Republican) Strong supporter of civil rights for blacks 1872: Ulysses Simpson Grant (Republican) Greeley supports civil rights too but he ended up dying. 1876: Rutherford Birchard Hayes (Republican) Tilden would have ended Reconstruction anyway. Also reasonable tariff policy 1880: James Garfield (Republican) Tariff policy 1884: James Gillespie Blaine (Republican) Tariff policy 1888: Benjamin Harrison (Republican) Tariff policy and naval buildup 1892: Benjamin Harrison (Republican) Annexation of Hawaii 1896: William McKinley (Republican) Bryan is a nut regarding economics. Plus the Spanish-American War 1900: William McKinley (Republican) Ditto 1904: Theodore Roosevelt (Republican) Roosevelt truly strengthened America and Parker was just a colourless man. 1908: William Howard Taft (Republican) Same as '96 and '00. 1912: Theodore Roosevelt (Progressive) He would have done something to prevent World War I or intervened. Plus Wilson was a racist bigot. 1916: Charles Evan Hughes (Republican) No Wilson. 1920: James Middleton Cox (Democratic) Harding was while not corrupt himself a very weak President plus Cox would have joined the League of Nations. 1924: John Calvin Coolidge Jr. (Republican) Coolidge was an alright President. 1928: Herbert Hoover (Republican) Al Smith couldn’t have done much about the Depression either. 1932: Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Democratic) Hoover was discredited by 1932 and we needed a strong President although not all of the New Deal may have been wise. 1936: Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Democratic) Alf Landon couldn’t have dealt with the crisis brewing in Asia and Europe. 1940: Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Democratic) Willkie would have had his hand tied in foreign policy by the isolationists 1944: Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Democratic) Bad idea to change Presidents during wartime. 1948: Harry S Truman (Democratic) Truman and Dewey were pretty much similar and the fact that Truman is more experienced makes him the winner 1952: Dwight David Eisenhower (Republican) A good President who was light-years ahead of Stevenson 1956: Dwight David Eisenhower (Republican) Ditto 1960: Richard Milhous Nixon (Republican) Hmm an experienced, moderate, pro-civil rights, anticommunist Republican over an inexperienced, waffling profilgarte? 1964: Lyndon Baines Johnson (Democratic) Close choice but Goldwater’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act clinches this. 1968: Richard Milhous Nixon (Republican) Only Nixon could have gone to China. 1972: Richard Milhous Nixon (Republican) Standing by Nixon! McGovern was the most liberal candidate in American history. 1976: Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr. (Republican) Ford’s isn’t great but Carter was terrible. 1980: Ronald Wilson Reagan (Republican) Carter’s bad and Reagan’s far better. 1984: Ronald Wilson Reagan (Republican) Mondale’s even worse. 1988: George Herbert Walker Bush (Republican) Dukakis was your typical liberal and Bush had a highly successful foreign policy. 1992: George Herbert Walker Bush (Republican) Again Bush Sr. was highly successful in foreign policy and moderate in economics. 1996: Robert Joseph Dole (Republican) Close choice but I’ll take the pro-life candidate. 2000: George Walker Bush (Republican) Close choice but Gore wouldn’t have invaded Iraq which would have meant Saddam would still be around to-day. 2004: George Walker Bush (Republican) Kerry would have withdrawn from Iraq which would have been disastrous. 2008: John Sidney McCain III (Republican) Would have been less controversial than Obama and less likely to propose controversial stuff. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/2 "2010-10-09T17:16:27Z")
Some of your choices, Curtis, look silly, while others are illogical or reprehensible. You credit Lincoln with saving the union in 1860, but of course he had done nothing of the kind yet. I would bet a lot of money that if you had the option in 1860 you would have seen him as a wild-eyed radical, proposing controversial stuff. I’ll give you credit for having the balls to admit that, even knowing what you know now, you would still have voted for Nixon three times.“Gotta go for the man who commits impeachable offenses, yup.” ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/3 "2010-10-09T17:45:50Z")
I’m just flabbergasted that Curtis would vote for any Democrat. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/4 "2010-10-09T17:52:25Z")
> [@](#): > > 2000: George Walker Bush (Republican) Close choice but Gore wouldn’t have invaded Iraq which would have meant Saddam would still be around to-day. and? > [@](#): > > 1972: Richard Milhous Nixon (Republican) Standing by Nixon! McGovern was the **most liberal candidate in American histor** y. You say that as if it’s a bad thing? Does Nixon lose any points for being a crook? > [@](#): > > 2008: John Sidney McCain III (Republican) Would have been less controversial than Obama and less likely to propose controversial stuff. Is the President’s job to avoid controversy? If so, maybe rethink your support for Lincoln. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/5 "2010-10-09T17:57:52Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > You credit Lincoln with saving the union in 1860, but of course he had done nothing of the kind yet. I would bet a lot of money that if you had the option in 1860 you would have seen him as a wild-eyed radical, proposing controversial stuff. Plus in most southern states he wasn’t even on the ballot and write-in votes were largely disregarded (not that he got many- in Virginia, where he _was_ on the ballot, he got only 1% of the vote). Plus before the late 19th century elections often had three or more major and viable candidates rather than the two that people alive today can relate to; in 1860 for example there were 4 candidates who received electoral votes. Also any alternative win totally skewers the following elections. Without Jackson, for example, you would almost certainly not have had William Henry Harrison as a major candidate in 1840 and had Fremont been elected Lincoln would probably not have even run in 1860. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/6 "2010-10-09T18:03:51Z")
Your 1800 vote for TJ seems out of place. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/7 "2010-10-09T18:59:11Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Some of your choices, Curtis, look silly, while others are illogical or reprehensible. You credit Lincoln with saving the union in 1860, but of course he had done nothing of the kind yet. I would bet a lot of money that if you had the option in 1860 you would have seen him as a wild-eyed radical, proposing controversial stuff. I’ll give you credit for having the balls to admit that, even knowing what you know now, you would still have voted for Nixon three times.“Gotta go for the man who commits impeachable offenses, yup.” As if JFK was some sort of a saint. Just getting assassinated doesn’t wash you away of all your crimes. Yes it was tragic (I don’t deny that) but Kennedy did things just as corrupt as Nixon. > [@Procrustus](#): > > You say that as if it’s a bad thing? Does Nixon lose any points for being a crook? Well I’m a conservative. > [@](#): > > Is the President’s job to avoid controversy? If so, maybe rethink your support for Lincoln. Outside of no UHC bill I don’t think McCain would have been too different but rather more restrained than Obama (ie a limited stimulus, slower withdrawal from Iraq, McChrystal doesn’t get sacked etc,) and less nuts running around. [quote=“Sampiro, post:5, topic:556603”] > [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > You credit Lincoln with saving the union in 1860, but of course he had done nothing of the kind yet. I would bet a lot of money that if you had the option in 1860 you would have seen him as a wild-eyed radical, proposing controversial stuff. In the XIXth Century I would have been a liberal though not a socialist or even a social democrat. Nor was Lincoln controversial-he was nominated by the moderate wing of the Republicans. > [@](#): > > Also any alternative win totally skewers the following elections. Without Jackson, for example, you would almost certainly not have had William Henry Harrison as a major candidate in 1840 and had Fremont been elected Lincoln would probably not have even run in 1860. That’s quite true. > [@spark240](#): > > Your 1800 vote for TJ seems out of place. Why? ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/8 "2010-10-09T19:12:53Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > > [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > > > Some of your choices, Curtis, look silly, while others are illogical or reprehensible. You credit Lincoln with saving the union in 1860, but of course he had done nothing of the kind yet. I would bet a lot of money that if you had the option in 1860 you would have seen him as a wild-eyed radical, proposing controversial stuff. I’ll give you credit for having the balls to admit that, even knowing what you know now, you would still have voted for Nixon three times.“Gotta go for the man who commits impeachable offenses, yup.” > > As if JFK was some sort of a saint. Just getting assassinated doesn’t wash you away of all your crimes. Yes it was tragic (I don’t deny that) but Kennedy did things just as corrupt as Nixon. I agree that JFK doesn’t get half the kicking around he deserves from historians, mainly because Vietnam was _his_ damned crusade and Nixon actually had the political acumen to wind it down. (Yes, Nixon ended his generation’s version of Iraq. Does that change your vote?) On the other hand, Nixon was the first President in the modern era to treat the Constitution as his toilet paper and the Oval Office as his personal possession. Just because JFK is unjustly lionized does not mean Nixon is unjustly vilified. You didn’t vote for Andrew Jackson. Why vote for his modern doppelganger, Richard Nixon? > [@](#): > > Well I’m a conservative. That’s not a reason, that’s an excuse. Also: > [@](#): > > 1868: Ulysses Simpson Grant (Republican) Strong supporter of civil rights for blacks This is a joke, right? Reconstruction died on Grant’s watch, due to Grant’s inability to handle the Panic of 1873. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/9 "2010-10-09T19:18:57Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > > [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > > > As if JFK was some sort of a saint. Just getting assassinated doesn’t wash you away of all your crimes. Yes it was tragic (I don’t deny that) but Kennedy did things just as corrupt as Nixon. > > I agree that JFK doesn’t get half the kicking around he deserves from historians, mainly because Vietnam was _his_ damned crusade and Nixon actually had the political acumen to wind it down. > > (Yes, Nixon ended his generation’s version of Iraq. Does that change your vote?) > > On the other hand, Nixon was the first President in the modern era to treat the Constitution as his toilet paper and the Oval Office as his personal possession. Just because JFK is unjustly lionized does not mean Nixon is unjustly vilified. He had little choice but to end the war. And no Nixon was not the only President to do questionable things. Wilson suppressed opponents of World War I and JFK may have done some election rigging which is an even worse crime than Nixon’s. > [@](#): > > You didn’t vote for Andrew Jackson. Why vote for his modern doppelganger, Richard Nixon? Andrew Jackson was a demagouge and an ignorant fool fit for one of those Roman generals who seized power. Nixon on the other hand was an experienced and intelligent politician. > [@](#): > > That’s not a reason, that’s an excuse. As a result I’d believe the McGovern presidency would have been disastrous. > [@](#): > > 1868: Ulysses Simpson Grant (Republican) Strong supporter of civil rights for blacks This is a joke, right? Reconstruction died on Grant’s watch, due to Grant’s inability to handle the Panic of 1873. [/QUOTE] And Seymour would not have done anything for civil rights either. And Greeley ended up dying. In addition Grant sent troops to the South to enforce civil rights. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/10 "2010-10-09T19:20:34Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > 2000: George Walker Bush (Republican) Close choice but Gore wouldn’t have invaded Iraq which would have meant Saddam would still be around to-day. Yeah, but he neglected to invade North Korea, and as a result, Kim Jong Il is still around today. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/11 "2010-10-09T19:33:23Z")
[QUOTE=Curtis LeMay] Andrew Jackson was a demagouge and an ignorant fool fit for one of those Roman generals who seized power. Nixon on the other hand was an experienced and intelligent politician. [/QUOTE] A demagogue absolutely, but his worst enemy (which you’d be hard picked to answer who that was since the pickings are so plentiful) would have been far more likely to call him an evil genius than an ignorant fool. > [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > > > 2000: George Walker Bush (Republican) Close choice but Gore wouldn’t have invaded Iraq which would have meant Saddam would still be around to-day. > > Yeah, but he neglected to invade North Korea, and as a result, Kim Jong Il is still around today. He left the majority of the countries on the globe uninvaded. Damned two-term limits. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/12 "2010-10-09T19:33:25Z")
This is turning into a referendum on Curtis Lemay rather than on US presidents, so in that spirit, may I ask, Curtis, when exactly, during the early 19th century, did your position on slavery change, and why? And when did you come around to the idea that tariffs should have been replaced by a national income tax? And which conservative argument applies to Hoover/Roosevelt in 1932 which didn’t apply to Nixon/ McGovern forty years later? You’re making my brain hurt. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/13 "2010-10-09T19:39:31Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > This is turning into a referendum on Curtis Lemay rather than on US presidents, so in that spirit, may I ask, Curtis, when exactly, during the early 19th century, did your position on slavery change, and why? And when did you come around to the idea that tariffs should have been replaced by a national income tax? And which conservative argument applies to Hoover/Roosevelt in 1932 which didn’t apply to Nixon/ McGovern forty years later? You’re making my brain hurt. I’d always be an abolitionist as Jefferson and JQ Adams was. And I’d first believe the income tax to be necessary during wartime in the American Civil War and than later in the 1890s as government’s role expanded. Plus Roosevelt was an interventionist and internationalist while McGovern would have less than ideal against the Communists. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/14 "2010-10-09T19:41:06Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > > [@Derleth](#): > > > > I agree that JFK doesn’t get half the kicking around he deserves from historians, mainly because Vietnam was _his_ damned crusade and Nixon actually had the political acumen to wind it down. > > > > (Yes, Nixon ended his generation’s version of Iraq. Does that change your vote?) > > > > On the other hand, Nixon was the first President in the modern era to treat the Constitution as his toilet paper and the Oval Office as his personal possession. Just because JFK is unjustly lionized does not mean Nixon is unjustly vilified. > > He had little choice but to end the war. True. He realized its popularity was going off a cliff and it couldn’t be won. He was very much unlike GWB, which is why I’m surprised he has your votes. > [@](#): > > And no Nixon was not the only President to do questionable things. Wilson suppressed opponents of World War I This is true. On the other hand, Nixon increased surveillance on citizens not accused of any real crimes, used his office to persecute his personal enemies, and deliberately failed to remove G. Gordon Liddy from any kind of position of trust or responsibility. Then there’s the whole Watergate thing. > [@](#): > > and JFK may have done some election rigging which is an even worse crime than Nixon’s. So, what JFK was rumored to have done was worse than what Nixon can be proved to have done? > [@](#): > > Andrew Jackson was a demagouge and an ignorant fool fit for one of those Roman generals who seized power. Nixon on the other hand was an experienced and intelligent politician. You’re on to something here. Nixon was a smart man, he was a good administrator in some capacity, but he was blinded by his paranoia and his lust for power. He should have become a college professor and never risen in the ranks even as high as dean. > [@](#): > > And Seymour would not have done anything for civil rights either. And Greeley ended up dying. In addition Grant sent troops to the South to enforce civil rights. You might also have something here as well. However, Grant was also too trusting and not nearly intelligent enough to be President, especially given all the tightropes he had to walk after the Civil War. Worse, one of his main skills seemed to be covering up corruption, as opposed to admitting he was an idiot and his friends were slimeballs. Also, his goldbug policies turned the Panic of 1873 into a full-on crisis (Ron Paul isn’t listening, is he?) which, as I said, was a factor in the end of Reconstruction. But we’ll be able to go back and forth on Grant all week if we let ourselves. Let’s just say that he was a deeply ambiguous character and both our positions have some merit. ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2010, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/15 "2010-10-09T22:11:48Z")
Nixon went to China. Nixon went to China. Nixon went to China. I’ve been hearing that my whole life and I’m sick to death of it. So bloody what? Most over-hyped “accomplishment” in the history of American politics. Nixon was a corrupt, bigoted criminal. To say you would vote for him knowing that he would disgrace the United States, well, you’re not a conservative, you’re a blind partisan who puts party before the good of the nation. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/16 "2010-10-10T00:59:27Z")
Moving from IMHO to Great Debates. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/17 "2010-10-10T01:53:29Z")
I think this thread asks an excellent question. One which I don’t think I, nor any of us can honestly or objectively answer. After all, how can any of us judge the candidates from an era that we didn’t live in? I have no reversals in voting for Reagan, Reagan, Bush, Bush, Dole, Bush, and Bush. (I did **NOT** vote for Obama). I also feel that, in my lifetime, if it were legal at the time, I would have voted for Nixon, Goldwater, Nixon, Nixon, and Ford with no real regrets. But how can I say how I would have voted in 1840? I have no real concept of what life was like for the average Joe back then. Were there Congressmen pushing to restrict my right to bear arms? Bullying my state into laws they didn’t want? Empirical wars all around the globe? Insane taxation? Social tyranny via political correctness? No. I can’t judge my actions in 1840 from a 2010 lifestyle any more than I can judge the actions in 2010 of someone living in 1840. Grant me eternal life and a time machine and I could honestly answer the OP’s question. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/18 "2010-10-10T01:59:06Z")
> [@BlankSlate](#): > > Nixon went to China. Nixon went to China. Nixon went to China. I’ve been hearing that my whole life and I’m sick to death of it. So bloody what? Most over-hyped “accomplishment” in the history of American politics. The more I think about this, the more I agree. Nixon going to China seems to be sold as the turning point in China opening up to the outside world. So, if Nixon had stayed home, China would have become like North Korea? Not happening. Not with their material and labor resources. It would have been economic suicide with nobody to bail them out. Would China have opened up to someone else? Who? They’d burned their bridges with the Soviet Union by that point, India wasn’t big enough to satisfy them, and neither was Europe or anyone else. _We_ were _it_. So what did Nixon going to China accomplish, other than giving the Vulcans a gnomic saying? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/19 "2010-10-10T02:16:26Z")
We know the kid is a republican ,but his defenses are weak. My first campaign was for Stevenson. He was an extremely intelligent and articulate man. The press called him an egghead. He was badly treated by the TV and newspapers who as always want the repub. I had no use for Ike as a campaigner or as a president. His whole term was a series of golf games. he played hundreds of rounds, showing very little interest in governance. There were plenty of scandals during his administration. It was only later that I discovered he had disdain for the politicians he worked for because they were changing the country in new and dangerous ways. His warning of the Military/industrial/media complex was sincere and accurate. His analysis of Nixon and his obvious dislike for Tricky Dicky was palpable. When his presidency was up ,they asked him to back Nixon. He did ,by saying that Nixon was the most involved and hard working VP ever. The reporter followed up by asking for examples of what he did. Ike said,“I can’t think of any thing right now, but ask me at another time and I am sure I can think of something.” I think more highly of him as a prophet, but he was not much of a president. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2010, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603/20 "2010-10-10T15:54:28Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > We know the kid is a republican ,but his defenses are weak. > My first campaign was for Stevenson. He was an extremely intelligent and articulate man. The press called him an egghead. He was badly treated by the TV and newspapers who as always want the repub. Through most of the recent years the major papers have taken a centre-left position. Nothing like MSNBC liberalism but still in general support liberal policies and endorse Democrats (for instance the Times of LA endorsed voting against Prop 8). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-have-voted-in-the-past-redux/556603.md?page=2)