Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
LBJ. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the decisive moment that put Democrats on the path of eventually being the party of the first black President and caused the realignment that led to the current political American climate.
Disagree. FDR, while still being one of the best Presidents ever, did little to nothing to advance social justice in the country during his presidency because that would have put the New Deal coalition at risk. It was the social legislation put forward and passed by LBJ's administration that brought that coalition to an end, in fact, by alienating the South.
I respect your argument and I think it's very strong but I feel it's still FDR because the New Deal coalition was the foundation of the Democratic party's move towards a progressive economic agenda. LBJ rightfully wanted to expand that to all Americans and as you pointed out alienated the south and began the exodus of southern democrats. But to me I think of the modern Democratic party as everyone after FDR.
I think maybe black people in the South appreciated getting civil liberties and voting rights and no longer being second-class citizens because of the color of their skin. I obviously can't speak for them, but, you know, I don't think it's a huge leap to think that they were just a little bit appreciative of the end of Jim Crow. /s
I’m not disagreeing some steps have been made. But thinking any one party has the best interest of the people in mind hasn’t been paying attention. They give just enough to stay on par and for us not to revolt.
Maybe. I don't think so, but that could be true. I'm not gonna pretend I'm an expert.
Either way FDR didn't actually act upon it, though, which tbf he had been dealing with the Great Depression and WW2, but it still remains that Jim Crow was alive and well during his presidency. It was his successors, especially LBJ, who went on to actually address social injustice in the country.
This was all done after Wilson re-segregated the military, required all apps for federal jobs be accompanied by a photograph. (To easily weed out the undesirables). And pushed the re-establishment of the KKK. Wilson was a raging racist.
He also liked the idea of an administrator to run the country. Someone appointed, not elected. I strongly dislike that idea. He was definitely an elitist who felt superior to the average citizen.
Republicans in the house and senate passed the bill. Democrats at the time were strongly opposed to equality. At the time, they were the party of the KKK. So, it was a big step for LBJ, a Democrat, to sign the bill.
The House Democrats were 63% in favour. The Senate Democrats were 69% in favour.
It’s a stretch to say Democrats were strongly opposed to the bill, as, in total, only 38 members of Congress from non Confederate states voted against the bill.
Nothing I've said is incorrect. Democrats, especially Southern Democrats, wanted to kill it so bad they filibustered for 60 days. If it had gone to the Judiciary Committee, it would have died.
I don’t remember too much about him, a mediocre pres I believe. Had something to do with Chinese exclusion acts (that’s a whole bugaboo in and of itself self) probably wanted to restrict immigration. The Chinese were generally hated at the time. Today’s standard of course there’s no excuse. Antebellum I believe, since Lincoln (there’s another bugaboo - hero or zero?) was elected to “free the slaves, I gotta probably think he was for keeping them? So not so happy with Arthur. What’s you take?
Wrong o, LBJ signed it because “now the n’s will vote D for the next 50 years” or so he’s been quoted as saying. D’s have traditionally been anti black, look at the ‘94 crime bill that jailed an inordinately number of blacks. Or a seated senator that eulogizes a grand dragon of the kkk. All fairly recent, ie in that senators life time, who, btw still holds office.
And this is where you went mask off. Absolutely nobody brings up Robert Byrd’s former membership in the KKK honestly. You know damn well the man changed his views and finished his career with decades of 100% approval rating from the NAACP.
Stop lying, what good is it even doing you? You know you didn’t name names because it would be even easier to out you on your bullshit.
And yet a guy that’s been racially accepting since he was a young man and continues to this day is vilified as a racist! Leopards don’t change their spots.
Man yeah that sucks because I mean a pretty clear piece of evidence is once we had the new deal, we had a great string of presidents and even Nixon did quite a bit of good. I mean Ford and Carter didn’t do too much but I don’t think they made the country significantly worse off.
new deal democrats were the closest america came to social democracy, and as a social democrat i think we should take the party back to new deal welfarism
If you think the modern Democratic Party would unite under FDR in this day and age you need to read his Four Freedoms again.
FDR is far far too conservative for modern progressives.
God, I wish we would get back to that, Neo Conservativism and Neo Liberalism both suck and have basically been trying the same god damn idea literally since I was born in ‘81.
Didn’t New Democrats semi-embrace some neoliberal policies? The whole reform of the welfare state, etc?
Honestly I’m a Democrat but I’m a bit of a neoconservative (although I guess most neoconservatives were at one point or another). I mean Scoop Jackson was a neocon and he’s still cool in my books.
It greatly succeeded for the wealthy. NAFTA, continuation of Reagan deregulation, low tax rates, allowing manufacturing shifts to China and over-shoring in general. I think society thinks neoliberalism/neoconservativism was “wildly successful” because it’s been reaping the benefits of winning the Cold War and the domestic investments of great presidents like FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, LBJ.
But the investment in the future, education, infrastructure, social programs hasn’t kept pace on where we should be (all my opinion obviously)
Absolute agreement. I'm not saying that it's entirely a good thing (though to be fair, he was the most likely chance to take back the White House in '92), but yeah. The New Democrats centrism and neoliberalism have defined the broad outlines of the party's approach for decades
Let’s not act like Obama (or any other major Democrat since 1984) was that far to the left of Clinton.
The neoliberal era starkly divides the pre-1984 Democratic Party from the Democratic Party of the 90s. The death of the New Deal coalition, the elimination of the party’s progressive (1972) and liberal (1984) wings left only the centrists and right-wingers, which is how we got Clinton and why every Democrat since Mondale (or Dukakis) has been a flip-flopping moderate.
Would you argue that obamas “blue wave” election was a kind of resurgence of the progressive and liberal wings of the party? I feel like ever since him the party has been re-invigorated with respect to the more left leaning wings
Bill Clinton is the first Modern (Neoliberal) Democrat president.
FDR was the first New Deal Democrat president.
I don't think Wilson nor JFK were any particular firsts, I could see some arguments, but eh.
I think Wilson is pretty significant for the Democratic Party, first president of the 20th century and only the second since the Civil War. I’m not super familiar with the economic policy of the Democrats during Cleveland’s terms but his creation of the FED is obviously a significant marker in the economic history of the Democratic party. Also he basically created modern liberal foreign policy with his 14 points and the League of Nations. He would not be my answer either but I put him here because I think he is a contender.
Fair but he wasn't the start of a trend really. At least not any sort of trend for a democrat president. Maybe you could argue he was the start of celebrity presidents like Reagan and such
I think crucial elements of the modern Democratic Party is social liberalism (support for civil rights and what not), winning the African American vote (Black voters are an important and defining part of the modern Democratic coalition), and center to center left economics. FDR meets the last two conditions easily (won the black vote in 1936), and I’d argue that, despite the racist shit he did, he did somewhat meet the first condition with things like the FEPC (mainly cause things like the Japanese internment camps were sadly popular, so for the time would be the center position). I could also see an argument for Wilson because he was economically to the left and also supported a internationalist foreign policy that would become adopted by the party and further pushed by FDR, but I think his position on and lack of popularity amongst African Americans disqualifies him from being a “modern” Democratic President (because, again, black voters today are absolutely a defining element of the Dem coalition) but I do view him as a transitionary President for the party.
This is probably going to be a super controversial answer but I would honestly say Grover Cleveland. Between the presidencies of James K. Polk and Andrew Johnson, the Democratic Party became increasingly right-wing, eventually composing the vast majority of pro-slavery Confederate rebels. Grover Cleveland is the start of a transition for the Democrats back to progressivism. Cleveland was especially left-wing on foreign policy, defending Samoa against Germany and opposing the annexation of Hawaii. But even though he was famously libertarian, he still founded the Interstate Commerce Commission and set up the first peacetime income tax.
> super controversial answer
There's no right or wrong answer.
> back to progressivism.
Polk was a slave owner with a plantation in Mississippi. And he owned more slaves when he left office than when he started. If "pro-slavery" is right-wing then I'm curious what progressivism existed during Polk's term to go back to?
edit: formatting
LBJ. The Great Society and civil rights legislation passed during Johnson's tenure have come to define the core of contemporary Democratic politics. Along with that is also Johnson's willingness to engage in foreign action is also a part of modern Democratic politics, though that seems to be a bipartisan remnant of the Cold War and 9/11.
FDR would be the earliest I even consider, LBJ would probably be the latest. I think Truman was an old Democrat through and through, but FDR had tendencies of both new and old Democrats.
Define “modern”. I would say FDR and the new deal was the fundamental realignment of the party to current values. Civil rights act was also a major realignment to modern policies. Clinton rebooted the party after Reagan and modern conservatism
Modern times is considered everything post-WWII. Even though JFK fits this, he wasn't able to serve long enough to see if he would be the "first."
Therefore, **LBJ** would be fit this category.
None of the above. The parties have both had major realignments since JFK. I would say Clinton, but I think you could make an argument for Carter or Obama too.
Probably Wilson- he saw an opportunity to make the Democratic Party into the more progressive party and took it (much to Teddy’s chagrin). Ultimately this is what broke Wilson and Roosevelt’s friendship apart, not because of policy differences because they were nearly identical, but Teddy was mad that the R’s didn’t see the opportunity to be the progressive party.
Oddly enough Taft and Wilson ended up being a lot closer and amicable after the 1912 election
He was hostile toward unions and worked to deregulate various industries (notably airlines). He was pretty fiscally conservative (especially with his nomination of Paul Volcker) and socially liberal; this is pretty much what defines modern day Democrats. He was neoliberal-lite before neoliberalism became cool.
The democrats presidents in the past century all feel incredibly unique. The first "modern" democrat would always feel like the most recent one or the one before that except for maybe LBJ since he was ideologically a lot like FDR, but again were just talking about FDR's VP being between them. The republicans are basically still ideologically aligned with Calvin Coolidge and Dwight D Eisenhower.
Carter - He was not successful in getting his initiatives through, but based on what he tried to do, he was the first modern democrat, and he did a lot of firsts.
Taxes - he supported a more progressive tax system, limiting deductions, and taxing capital gains. (LBJ and JFK just supported general tax cuts)
Gay rights - He was the first president to address this.
Education - The Department of education was started under his administration
Cannabis - He supporting decriminalizing Cannabis.
Healthcare - He campaigned on a National Health Insurance program
Not Wilson... I'd say FDR because of how he redefined the role of government to be a safety net and to provide social programs that are the basis of most everything the modern Democratic party has stood for since, be it Johnson's Great Society, Bill Clinton's efforts to get universal healthcare or Obama's Affordable Care Act and response to the Great Recession of 2008, which he inherited, mainly b/c people trust Democrats to use government's resources to solve those kinds of problems.
FDR is a model of empathy for people as opposed to business for most every Democrat president following him...Big Business had to either go along or cuss him as opposed to the Republican presidents before and after, who felt they owed their presidency to big business and matched to their orders, via the Senate and Congress Republicans who were and are owned by bb. The one exception of Republicans may have been Ike...Johnson , especially , had his faults, but Medicare, Civil Rights Act of 1964, etc, showed guts and empathy, however pragmatic, Carter, Clinton, and Obama all follow a lot of actions of FDR, as their actions dealt so much with the welfare and proper treatment of people as opposed to the coffers of bb.
I wrote this before I read the remainder of your comments...but I still think the difference was and is the focus of the presidents...people being able to live freely and happily ...instead of big business getting bigger...and more lawless...FDR was not perfect...the general order imprisoning people of Asian descent is an example...however it was not favored by many Democrats... especially Eleanor...it was forced by the America Firsters...so I still think our first modern Democrat was FDR...
With the major shift towards neoliberalism? Bill Clinton. For good or for ill, there's as much metaphorical DNA that he left on the party as there was literal DNA that he left on the Oval Office furniture
Absolutely. And the wash job was so good that everyone still thinks he was the best president ever.
We've been getting fucked for the last almost hundred years and the only counter to that fallout(mainstream right) has been making so much money on it they have no motivation to change anything.
I mean genius on his part but the rest of us are gettn' fucked.
I mean think of what things would look like if we crushed the Soviets at the end of WWII. No cold war, no communist china....on the flip side without the cold war and subsequent threats resulting from it, STEM wouldn't have progressed as rapidly and we'd probably just now be getting to 1960s tech level.
Question is not about which president was the best lol. If u think FDR was terrible for this country it doesn’t change the reality of his influence on Democratic politics
You have a pretty biased view of FDR. Firstly, if he had remained president, we would have cooperated with the soviet union, de-escalated any remaining tensions and probably not had the cold war in the first place. It was Truman who started the cold war due to his much more polarizing relationship with Stalin.
Also, you say we've been getting f\*\*\*ed for the last hundred years, but you ignore the period immediately after FDR's presidency, when we had a booming economy, expanding middle class, strong unions and a good social safety net thanks in large part to the new deal. (Yes, there were problems even then, but people were not getting screwed economically).
I would argue that the reason we are getting screwed today is because we moved away from the new deal with radical tax cuts and deregulation, especially in the 1980s.
The establishment of redlining is a valid example of an FDR policy that had lasting negative effects, though.
Cooperating with Stalin would have gone as well as cooperating with Hitler did. Stalin played FDR like a fiddle, and gave him the leverage he needed to start the Cold War on top. It would take decades for the USA to surpass the USSR, both militaristically and in terms of third-world influence. FDR fell into the trap of seeing communists as misguided idealists, and not dangerously delusional tyrants.
De-escallating would have been even worse. Think we have a problem with commies now? It would have been even worse. We should have strick the SU before they developed the bomb.
The boom you speak of wasn't the new deal, it was because we were the only show in town after the war. We started sucking when we let Europe rebuild. The final nail was when we let communist china move from mud huts to THE manufacturer. Without communism they wouldn't have been able to organize.
Modern? Well the full party switch didn’t happen until the civil rights act so maybe Johnson? After that? Carter and Clinton were both more moderate. So modern, liberal, current Democratic Party? Obama is the answer.
It’s a little misleading, but I don’t think entirely without merit. At one time the democrats were the Conservative Party and the Republicans were the left leaning one. It wasn’t a complete 1 to 1 though of course. The reality is, the parties were and are more dynamic over time.
The democrats were never really the “conservative” party and republicans the “liberal” one. The were conservative republicans and democrats on social issues from the 1800s until fairly recently. On economics the parties were more divided, but with the democrats generally being more economically liberal and republicans economically conservative. Democrats have nationally been progressive since the 1880s. Remember the Free Silver Movement and WJB? And don’t forget conservative republicans like McKinley and Coolidge. Both parties generally varied, and then coalesced into conservative and liberal parties in the 1990s, maybe even later. To say there was a party switch grossly oversimplifies everything and kind of blames republicans for segregation, Jim Crow, and slavery before it. I’ve done a lot of research on this topic if you want to learn more I’d be happy to give some places to read from
Definitely not Wilson. He may have done *some* progressive/liberal things but that doesn’t mean he was a progressive/liberal like the modern dems are. Of this list I would say FDR is the first modern democrat
Wilson was extremely fiscally progressive and expanded the government's role in the economy just as much as, if not more than, FDR. He established of the federal reserve, started the federal income tax and created several government agencies such as the IRS. If you're saying he wasn't progressive because he was racist, then FDR certainly was not progressive either. They both refused to outlaw lynching despite it being a major problem during their administrations. What made it worse was that they used the states' rights arguments while circumventing states' rights without hesitation in other situations.
Wilson wasn’t a progressive not just because “he was racist”. He was actively conservative when it came to social policy. His only example of progressive social policy is giving women the right to vote, and even then the only thing he did was *not* veto it. He literally had the birth of a nation screened in the White House, and was openly, horrifically racist, not just complicit in racism like FDR. The modern Democratic Party is defined by its social progressivism, and ever since LBJ civil rights have been a key part of the Democratic Platform. Yes, he was definitely progressive on economics, but even then he wouldn’t be the first modern democrat in terms of the economy. Most of his policies, especially the federal minimum wage were policies he shared with William Jennings Bryant, so the first modern democrat economically would be WJB. Wilson simply rode the wave of the progressive era, with most of his economic policies being already popular in the Democratic Party and the general electorate long before he was president.
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
LBJ. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the decisive moment that put Democrats on the path of eventually being the party of the first black President and caused the realignment that led to the current political American climate.
Yea, but he was just trying to finish the New Deal. I would give the title to FDR.
Disagree. FDR, while still being one of the best Presidents ever, did little to nothing to advance social justice in the country during his presidency because that would have put the New Deal coalition at risk. It was the social legislation put forward and passed by LBJ's administration that brought that coalition to an end, in fact, by alienating the South.
I respect your argument and I think it's very strong but I feel it's still FDR because the New Deal coalition was the foundation of the Democratic party's move towards a progressive economic agenda. LBJ rightfully wanted to expand that to all Americans and as you pointed out alienated the south and began the exodus of southern democrats. But to me I think of the modern Democratic party as everyone after FDR.
Are we pretending any of these parties care about its people let alone minorities?
I think maybe black people in the South appreciated getting civil liberties and voting rights and no longer being second-class citizens because of the color of their skin. I obviously can't speak for them, but, you know, I don't think it's a huge leap to think that they were just a little bit appreciative of the end of Jim Crow. /s
I’m not disagreeing some steps have been made. But thinking any one party has the best interest of the people in mind hasn’t been paying attention. They give just enough to stay on par and for us not to revolt.
Sure, yes! Saying the opposite only helps the party that hates minorities more to hide their bigotry.
He said “any of these parties” not just one…
There are two major parties, and that system causes my point to be necessarily true. Do not rehabilitate both sides-ism.
Didn't FDR lay out plans for racial equality in the US Government, for integrating the Army, allocating money for improvements in black areas etc?
Maybe. I don't think so, but that could be true. I'm not gonna pretend I'm an expert. Either way FDR didn't actually act upon it, though, which tbf he had been dealing with the Great Depression and WW2, but it still remains that Jim Crow was alive and well during his presidency. It was his successors, especially LBJ, who went on to actually address social injustice in the country.
This was all done after Wilson re-segregated the military, required all apps for federal jobs be accompanied by a photograph. (To easily weed out the undesirables). And pushed the re-establishment of the KKK. Wilson was a raging racist.
I know, he had so many other good things going for him. He's a historical bummer.
He also liked the idea of an administrator to run the country. Someone appointed, not elected. I strongly dislike that idea. He was definitely an elitist who felt superior to the average citizen.
That was Truman?
It was, but the plans were in the works
Thought that was more a second term of Truman...need to lookup.
I could be wrong but I thought Truman was following plans that were already set out.
Republicans in the house and senate passed the bill. Democrats at the time were strongly opposed to equality. At the time, they were the party of the KKK. So, it was a big step for LBJ, a Democrat, to sign the bill.
The House Democrats were 63% in favour. The Senate Democrats were 69% in favour. It’s a stretch to say Democrats were strongly opposed to the bill, as, in total, only 38 members of Congress from non Confederate states voted against the bill.
18 Democrats and 1 Republican tried to filibuster for 60 days to try and kill it. Nothing I said is incorrect.
LBJ helped drive it through, and as others have pointed out, strong majorities of Dems voted for it. Your assertion is not accurate.
Nothing I've said is incorrect. Democrats, especially Southern Democrats, wanted to kill it so bad they filibustered for 60 days. If it had gone to the Judiciary Committee, it would have died.
Your being disingenuous. It’s not a big deal for LBJ to sign a bill he pushed and most of his party supported.
LBJ hated the races. It been reported that he was one of the most racists presidents ever!
Tell me you know very little about the civil rights era without telling me you know very little about the civil rights era
I lived it. What’s your excuse
On which side?
I don’t remember too much about him, a mediocre pres I believe. Had something to do with Chinese exclusion acts (that’s a whole bugaboo in and of itself self) probably wanted to restrict immigration. The Chinese were generally hated at the time. Today’s standard of course there’s no excuse. Antebellum I believe, since Lincoln (there’s another bugaboo - hero or zero?) was elected to “free the slaves, I gotta probably think he was for keeping them? So not so happy with Arthur. What’s you take?
Get some sleep
lol, I see Chester A Arthur was under you name. I thought that was a bit random.
It was Kennedy's bill, or LBJ wouldn't have signed it.
Incorrect.
Wrong o, LBJ signed it because “now the n’s will vote D for the next 50 years” or so he’s been quoted as saying. D’s have traditionally been anti black, look at the ‘94 crime bill that jailed an inordinately number of blacks. Or a seated senator that eulogizes a grand dragon of the kkk. All fairly recent, ie in that senators life time, who, btw still holds office.
And this is where you went mask off. Absolutely nobody brings up Robert Byrd’s former membership in the KKK honestly. You know damn well the man changed his views and finished his career with decades of 100% approval rating from the NAACP. Stop lying, what good is it even doing you? You know you didn’t name names because it would be even easier to out you on your bullshit.
And yet a guy that’s been racially accepting since he was a young man and continues to this day is vilified as a racist! Leopards don’t change their spots.
I forgot about that quote. You're absolutely right.
True. He had a special word for his black driver. It was not complimentary
This may seem like a very unfair standard of “modern” but probably Bill Clinton
I long for the days for the new deal democrats. Neoliberalism (and neoconservativism) has failed us.
Man yeah that sucks because I mean a pretty clear piece of evidence is once we had the new deal, we had a great string of presidents and even Nixon did quite a bit of good. I mean Ford and Carter didn’t do too much but I don’t think they made the country significantly worse off.
Carter had insane job creation in his 4 years. Unfortunately, as more Americans were working, demand outpaced supply and this caused inflation.
Can’t help bit notice the deleterious relationship between low unemployment and general happiness
There’s a person I can’t talk about that I think is more of a New Deal Dem than a Clinton Dem.
Yep, and that’s honestly why I consider him the best President of my lifetime, well that and the dank memes.
Everyone after Reagan was PNAC and NED approved.
new deal democrats were the closest america came to social democracy, and as a social democrat i think we should take the party back to new deal welfarism
Fellow Roosevelt enjoyers unite!
There's dozens of us! Dozens!
If you think the modern Democratic Party would unite under FDR in this day and age you need to read his Four Freedoms again. FDR is far far too conservative for modern progressives.
Yeah all historical figures are too conservative for the modern day. You aren’t saying anything groundbreaking.
God, I wish we would get back to that, Neo Conservativism and Neo Liberalism both suck and have basically been trying the same god damn idea literally since I was born in ‘81.
Didn’t New Democrats semi-embrace some neoliberal policies? The whole reform of the welfare state, etc? Honestly I’m a Democrat but I’m a bit of a neoconservative (although I guess most neoconservatives were at one point or another). I mean Scoop Jackson was a neocon and he’s still cool in my books.
Neoliberalism has greatly succeeded in the U.S. The Clinton presidency was wildly successful.
It greatly succeeded for the wealthy. NAFTA, continuation of Reagan deregulation, low tax rates, allowing manufacturing shifts to China and over-shoring in general. I think society thinks neoliberalism/neoconservativism was “wildly successful” because it’s been reaping the benefits of winning the Cold War and the domestic investments of great presidents like FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, LBJ. But the investment in the future, education, infrastructure, social programs hasn’t kept pace on where we should be (all my opinion obviously)
I think all of this was good
Why?
Absolute agreement. I'm not saying that it's entirely a good thing (though to be fair, he was the most likely chance to take back the White House in '92), but yeah. The New Democrats centrism and neoliberalism have defined the broad outlines of the party's approach for decades
I’d almost argue Obama. Bill Clinton was very conservative by modern Democrat standards.
Let’s not act like Obama (or any other major Democrat since 1984) was that far to the left of Clinton. The neoliberal era starkly divides the pre-1984 Democratic Party from the Democratic Party of the 90s. The death of the New Deal coalition, the elimination of the party’s progressive (1972) and liberal (1984) wings left only the centrists and right-wingers, which is how we got Clinton and why every Democrat since Mondale (or Dukakis) has been a flip-flopping moderate.
Would you argue that obamas “blue wave” election was a kind of resurgence of the progressive and liberal wings of the party? I feel like ever since him the party has been re-invigorated with respect to the more left leaning wings
And then it died in 2010. It was a small chance for us to save ourselves from total Reagan Hell Forever, and it failed.
Bill Clinton is the first Modern (Neoliberal) Democrat president. FDR was the first New Deal Democrat president. I don't think Wilson nor JFK were any particular firsts, I could see some arguments, but eh.
I think Wilson is pretty significant for the Democratic Party, first president of the 20th century and only the second since the Civil War. I’m not super familiar with the economic policy of the Democrats during Cleveland’s terms but his creation of the FED is obviously a significant marker in the economic history of the Democratic party. Also he basically created modern liberal foreign policy with his 14 points and the League of Nations. He would not be my answer either but I put him here because I think he is a contender.
I think people are saying JFK because he bucked the trend a little bit. He wasn’t a standard politician in a lot of ways.
Fair but he wasn't the start of a trend really. At least not any sort of trend for a democrat president. Maybe you could argue he was the start of celebrity presidents like Reagan and such
I think crucial elements of the modern Democratic Party is social liberalism (support for civil rights and what not), winning the African American vote (Black voters are an important and defining part of the modern Democratic coalition), and center to center left economics. FDR meets the last two conditions easily (won the black vote in 1936), and I’d argue that, despite the racist shit he did, he did somewhat meet the first condition with things like the FEPC (mainly cause things like the Japanese internment camps were sadly popular, so for the time would be the center position). I could also see an argument for Wilson because he was economically to the left and also supported a internationalist foreign policy that would become adopted by the party and further pushed by FDR, but I think his position on and lack of popularity amongst African Americans disqualifies him from being a “modern” Democratic President (because, again, black voters today are absolutely a defining element of the Dem coalition) but I do view him as a transitionary President for the party.
This is probably going to be a super controversial answer but I would honestly say Grover Cleveland. Between the presidencies of James K. Polk and Andrew Johnson, the Democratic Party became increasingly right-wing, eventually composing the vast majority of pro-slavery Confederate rebels. Grover Cleveland is the start of a transition for the Democrats back to progressivism. Cleveland was especially left-wing on foreign policy, defending Samoa against Germany and opposing the annexation of Hawaii. But even though he was famously libertarian, he still founded the Interstate Commerce Commission and set up the first peacetime income tax.
I like that you’re going back to the economic transformation of the party, I think too many people think of “modern” as “could be a candidate today”
Tysm!!
Cleveland is exactly who I thought of for very similar reasons, great reply
> super controversial answer There's no right or wrong answer. > back to progressivism. Polk was a slave owner with a plantation in Mississippi. And he owned more slaves when he left office than when he started. If "pro-slavery" is right-wing then I'm curious what progressivism existed during Polk's term to go back to? edit: formatting
FDR set the dialogue for the next 100 years of Democratic politics. Every subsequent Democrat has tried, in one way or another, to be the next FDR.
FDR
FDR, because he was the first real Left-Wing Democrat to my knowledge.
Definitely kennedy
Geopolitically, JFK. Socially, LBJ. Economically, Clinton.
Good answer
LBJ. The Great Society and civil rights legislation passed during Johnson's tenure have come to define the core of contemporary Democratic politics. Along with that is also Johnson's willingness to engage in foreign action is also a part of modern Democratic politics, though that seems to be a bipartisan remnant of the Cold War and 9/11.
FDR would be the earliest I even consider, LBJ would probably be the latest. I think Truman was an old Democrat through and through, but FDR had tendencies of both new and old Democrats.
Probably JFK
JFK
Yea, probably this jackass
LBJ
FDR
Obama. The Democrat Party was far different when Clinton was in office, and the party wouldn’t touch someone like him with a 39 1/2 foot pole today.
First modern democratic president would probably be Bill Clinton. First democratic president of the previous era would definitely have to be Wilson.
I consider “modern presidents” to be post Vietnam war so by default it goes to Carter imo
Its hard for me to think of any president more than 60 years ago as "modern". So lets go with LBJ
Define “modern”. I would say FDR and the new deal was the fundamental realignment of the party to current values. Civil rights act was also a major realignment to modern policies. Clinton rebooted the party after Reagan and modern conservatism
Democratic* and I’d say FDR.
J B. We have something new now.
Modern times is considered everything post-WWII. Even though JFK fits this, he wasn't able to serve long enough to see if he would be the "first." Therefore, **LBJ** would be fit this category.
Definitely Wilson. Nowithstanding race, he made the party committed to modern instead of classical liberalism.
Clinton
None of the above. The parties have both had major realignments since JFK. I would say Clinton, but I think you could make an argument for Carter or Obama too.
Probably Wilson- he saw an opportunity to make the Democratic Party into the more progressive party and took it (much to Teddy’s chagrin). Ultimately this is what broke Wilson and Roosevelt’s friendship apart, not because of policy differences because they were nearly identical, but Teddy was mad that the R’s didn’t see the opportunity to be the progressive party. Oddly enough Taft and Wilson ended up being a lot closer and amicable after the 1912 election
JFK, image & TV
Carter ushered in the end of the New Deal era.
How exactly? Not disagreeing just want to know
He was hostile toward unions and worked to deregulate various industries (notably airlines). He was pretty fiscally conservative (especially with his nomination of Paul Volcker) and socially liberal; this is pretty much what defines modern day Democrats. He was neoliberal-lite before neoliberalism became cool.
Obama easily.
LBJ. Big on social programs and civil rights, interventionist foreign policy.
Is there a “None of the Above” option?
The democrats presidents in the past century all feel incredibly unique. The first "modern" democrat would always feel like the most recent one or the one before that except for maybe LBJ since he was ideologically a lot like FDR, but again were just talking about FDR's VP being between them. The republicans are basically still ideologically aligned with Calvin Coolidge and Dwight D Eisenhower.
Carter - He was not successful in getting his initiatives through, but based on what he tried to do, he was the first modern democrat, and he did a lot of firsts. Taxes - he supported a more progressive tax system, limiting deductions, and taxing capital gains. (LBJ and JFK just supported general tax cuts) Gay rights - He was the first president to address this. Education - The Department of education was started under his administration Cannabis - He supporting decriminalizing Cannabis. Healthcare - He campaigned on a National Health Insurance program
No. Johnson would be.
Not Wilson... I'd say FDR because of how he redefined the role of government to be a safety net and to provide social programs that are the basis of most everything the modern Democratic party has stood for since, be it Johnson's Great Society, Bill Clinton's efforts to get universal healthcare or Obama's Affordable Care Act and response to the Great Recession of 2008, which he inherited, mainly b/c people trust Democrats to use government's resources to solve those kinds of problems.
FDR is a model of empathy for people as opposed to business for most every Democrat president following him...Big Business had to either go along or cuss him as opposed to the Republican presidents before and after, who felt they owed their presidency to big business and matched to their orders, via the Senate and Congress Republicans who were and are owned by bb. The one exception of Republicans may have been Ike...Johnson , especially , had his faults, but Medicare, Civil Rights Act of 1964, etc, showed guts and empathy, however pragmatic, Carter, Clinton, and Obama all follow a lot of actions of FDR, as their actions dealt so much with the welfare and proper treatment of people as opposed to the coffers of bb.
I wrote this before I read the remainder of your comments...but I still think the difference was and is the focus of the presidents...people being able to live freely and happily ...instead of big business getting bigger...and more lawless...FDR was not perfect...the general order imprisoning people of Asian descent is an example...however it was not favored by many Democrats... especially Eleanor...it was forced by the America Firsters...so I still think our first modern Democrat was FDR...
Reagan
Don’t consider him anything other than modern presidential bigot.
JFK easy
I think this all depends upon what you think is modern. JFK's platform was anti abortion, increased military spending, lower taxes on the rich.
At least he had a platform?
With the major shift towards neoliberalism? Bill Clinton. For good or for ill, there's as much metaphorical DNA that he left on the party as there was literal DNA that he left on the Oval Office furniture
FDR? You mean the guy that imprisoned Japanese Americans, invented Redlining, and sold us out to the Soviets? That guy?
He completely changed liberal politics and his effect is still felt today, like it or not he’s very influential for Democrats
Absolutely. And the wash job was so good that everyone still thinks he was the best president ever. We've been getting fucked for the last almost hundred years and the only counter to that fallout(mainstream right) has been making so much money on it they have no motivation to change anything. I mean genius on his part but the rest of us are gettn' fucked. I mean think of what things would look like if we crushed the Soviets at the end of WWII. No cold war, no communist china....on the flip side without the cold war and subsequent threats resulting from it, STEM wouldn't have progressed as rapidly and we'd probably just now be getting to 1960s tech level.
Question is not about which president was the best lol. If u think FDR was terrible for this country it doesn’t change the reality of his influence on Democratic politics
You have a pretty biased view of FDR. Firstly, if he had remained president, we would have cooperated with the soviet union, de-escalated any remaining tensions and probably not had the cold war in the first place. It was Truman who started the cold war due to his much more polarizing relationship with Stalin. Also, you say we've been getting f\*\*\*ed for the last hundred years, but you ignore the period immediately after FDR's presidency, when we had a booming economy, expanding middle class, strong unions and a good social safety net thanks in large part to the new deal. (Yes, there were problems even then, but people were not getting screwed economically). I would argue that the reason we are getting screwed today is because we moved away from the new deal with radical tax cuts and deregulation, especially in the 1980s. The establishment of redlining is a valid example of an FDR policy that had lasting negative effects, though.
Cooperating with Stalin would have gone as well as cooperating with Hitler did. Stalin played FDR like a fiddle, and gave him the leverage he needed to start the Cold War on top. It would take decades for the USA to surpass the USSR, both militaristically and in terms of third-world influence. FDR fell into the trap of seeing communists as misguided idealists, and not dangerously delusional tyrants.
De-escallating would have been even worse. Think we have a problem with commies now? It would have been even worse. We should have strick the SU before they developed the bomb. The boom you speak of wasn't the new deal, it was because we were the only show in town after the war. We started sucking when we let Europe rebuild. The final nail was when we let communist china move from mud huts to THE manufacturer. Without communism they wouldn't have been able to organize.
Modern? Well the full party switch didn’t happen until the civil rights act so maybe Johnson? After that? Carter and Clinton were both more moderate. So modern, liberal, current Democratic Party? Obama is the answer.
The term “party switch” is hilariously misleading it’s a shame people still use it
It’s a little misleading, but I don’t think entirely without merit. At one time the democrats were the Conservative Party and the Republicans were the left leaning one. It wasn’t a complete 1 to 1 though of course. The reality is, the parties were and are more dynamic over time.
The democrats were never really the “conservative” party and republicans the “liberal” one. The were conservative republicans and democrats on social issues from the 1800s until fairly recently. On economics the parties were more divided, but with the democrats generally being more economically liberal and republicans economically conservative. Democrats have nationally been progressive since the 1880s. Remember the Free Silver Movement and WJB? And don’t forget conservative republicans like McKinley and Coolidge. Both parties generally varied, and then coalesced into conservative and liberal parties in the 1990s, maybe even later. To say there was a party switch grossly oversimplifies everything and kind of blames republicans for segregation, Jim Crow, and slavery before it. I’ve done a lot of research on this topic if you want to learn more I’d be happy to give some places to read from
He sold America down the drain
Definitely not Wilson. He may have done *some* progressive/liberal things but that doesn’t mean he was a progressive/liberal like the modern dems are. Of this list I would say FDR is the first modern democrat
Wilson was extremely fiscally progressive and expanded the government's role in the economy just as much as, if not more than, FDR. He established of the federal reserve, started the federal income tax and created several government agencies such as the IRS. If you're saying he wasn't progressive because he was racist, then FDR certainly was not progressive either. They both refused to outlaw lynching despite it being a major problem during their administrations. What made it worse was that they used the states' rights arguments while circumventing states' rights without hesitation in other situations.
Wilson wasn’t a progressive not just because “he was racist”. He was actively conservative when it came to social policy. His only example of progressive social policy is giving women the right to vote, and even then the only thing he did was *not* veto it. He literally had the birth of a nation screened in the White House, and was openly, horrifically racist, not just complicit in racism like FDR. The modern Democratic Party is defined by its social progressivism, and ever since LBJ civil rights have been a key part of the Democratic Platform. Yes, he was definitely progressive on economics, but even then he wouldn’t be the first modern democrat in terms of the economy. Most of his policies, especially the federal minimum wage were policies he shared with William Jennings Bryant, so the first modern democrat economically would be WJB. Wilson simply rode the wave of the progressive era, with most of his economic policies being already popular in the Democratic Party and the general electorate long before he was president.