Interesting. I wasn't aware Griffith's district had been in the RAT camp that long. Alot of these deep southern districts represented by "moderate" white Democrats had at least flirted with GOP congressmen once or twice since the 60s and 70s, especially in GOP landslide years like 1994. Griffith's switch kind of makes the district like Jefford's Vermont in reverse (The seat that Jeffords occupied had been held by a Republican from 1857, when Solomon Foot became a Republican, until 2001 when Jeffords became an Independent, making it the longest Republican-held seat in U.S. history.)
According to wikipedia, there were two non-RATs who held Parker Griffith's seat since the civil war, the aforementioned John Benton Callis, Republican, from 1868-1869, and Albert Taylor Goodwyn, elected on the Populist Party ticket (I assume that means he beat the RAT on the ballot?) from 1896-1897.
I'm sure the district has changed radically in shape since the 1860s, but apparently even back then it was still centered in Huntsville like it is today.
>> In 1869 Democrats were the conservative party and Republicans were the liberals. <<
I can't say I agree with that statement. The GOP in the 1860s was pretty much a single-issue "anti-slavery" party made up of various anti-slavery factions that defected from other political parties (Whigs, Democrats, Know-Nothing, etc.). Aside from all the members being committed to killing off slavery, they didn't have any unified beliefs on any other issues, which is why the GOP platforms from those eras were intentionally vague. They eventually formed their own little factions within the GOP, and by the 1880s the three main types were Stalwart Republicans (formerly "radical Republicans" during the slavery era), Half-Breed Republicans, and Liberal Republicans. These terms don't necessarily translate into today's politics either, as many of today's conservative Republicans would have been considered "moderate Republicans" by 1860s standards (because today's conservative Republicans tend to favor equal opportunity for all races, but do not favor using big government intervention to do so)
The RATs of the 1860s are even harder to explain. In that case there was a a huge regional difference between northern RATs and southern RATs. In some cases, the Dems have completely switched their views 180o degrees from their 19th century counterparts. But even the reconstruct era RATs were very different from the Jacksonian era RATs. One place where the two parties haven't changed at all is the GOP was always seen as the "corporate friendly" party that encouraged pro-buisness policies, whereas the Dems were seen as favoring more farmer and laborer friendly policies.
Overall it seems the RATs have changed their positions over the decades much more than the GOP has.
I'd say by the late 1890s, the two parties nationally had aligned into the political ideologies we associate with the GOP and Dems today.
BTW, where are the freepers who attacked Norm Coleman and Trey Greyson as "RINOs" on the basis that they "used to be Democrats" over a decade ago? (regardless of whether they switched because they were no longer comfortable with the RAT idealogy) They should be hoping mad that lifelong Democrat Parker Griffith is in the GOP now! :-)
Theodore Roosevelt was a liberal by any definition of the word. There is no denying that.
Most of the states that were Democratic in 1900 are Republican today and vice-versa. That shows that the parties switched. In 1900, Republicans were liberals and Democrats were conservatives. Today, that is reverse.
And if Lincoln were alive today he’d be a Democrat. Same for Grant and same for all of the radical Reconstruction guys. There has never been a more liberal president than Lincoln till now and there has never been a more liberal program than Radical Reconstruction
“According to wikipedia, there were two non-RATs who held Parker Griffith’s seat since the civil war, the aforementioned John Benton Callis, Republican, from 1868-1869, and Albert Taylor Goodwyn, elected on the Populist Party ticket (I assume that means he beat the RAT on the ballot?) from 1896-1897.”
Here’s the Wikipedia page on Alabama’s congressional delegations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Alabama I was able to figure out what the Huntsville-based CD was in the antebellum period, but I had assumed that the Huntsville-based CD had only had Democrat Representatives since Reconstruction because that’s what people have said for years. Looking at the Representatives from AL since the Civil War, it is difficult to ascertain which ones represented Huntsville or which district is the successor of which earlier one. Maybe another FReeper can be of assistance.