the slavery/anti-slavery thing was always a north-south thing, not a democrat-republican thing. Republicans were powerful in the north and then their base shifted to people from the south. Democrats shifted northward. As they shifted, so did their stance on things.
During reconstruction and until Jim Crow, the Republicans had a base in the South. And limited government and regulation isn’t a geographical belief but flipped between the two parties anyways, even before the Southern strategy, as we can see in the 20s. Northern Democratic Party was always a thing, and in fact its splitting of the vote against Southern Democrats was one of the reasons Lincoln won his first election.
the slavery/anti-slavery thing was always a north-south thing, not a democrat-republican thing. Republicans were powerful in the north and then their base shifted to people from the south. Democrats shifted northward. As they shifted, so did their stance on things.
The Republican Party was formed, explicitly, as an anti-slavery party.
because Michigan (and other states in the north- WI, for example,) were anti slavery.
the party’s base shifted more south-ward as they made inroads that way. and now we see that same assholishness come back. funny how that works.
From the architect himself: https://archive.org/details/emergingrepublic00kevi
Dude was 100% explicit on what he was doing and who he was doing it with, he was scarily honest about their dedication to racism.
During reconstruction and until Jim Crow, the Republicans had a base in the South. And limited government and regulation isn’t a geographical belief but flipped between the two parties anyways, even before the Southern strategy, as we can see in the 20s. Northern Democratic Party was always a thing, and in fact its splitting of the vote against Southern Democrats was one of the reasons Lincoln won his first election.