His name was Abraham Lincoln.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln
To your question, are you suggesting that you think that slavery fell clearly along the lines of liberalism and conservatism?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln
To your question, are you suggesting that you think that slavery fell clearly along the lines of liberalism and conservatism?
Also, according to wikipedia: "The republican party [..] founded by anti-slavery activists in 1854".
Now I'm no republican, as a north european you'll find me to be more of the social/liberal kind (yeah.. those two can be together), but I think the republican party has a pretty swell history.
Both parties have nothing to do with the parties they used to be even 50 years ago.
The republican party became evangelical/right wing in the end of the 70's. But it is not sustainable because of demographics.
A funny fact is most Latinos and Blacks are culturaly more conservative than liberal ( christians / anti-gay ...) , but given the hate on the right they are not going to vote for republicans. And Obama is certainly not a communist. He is not even a progressive.
I was looking for some sources to support that claim when I found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia_in_the_Latino_commun...
and this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia_in_the_Black_communi...
It's true! Wikipedia says so.
Uhh. Those states may be Republican now, but none of them went for Lincoln: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elec...
> Then the republican Lincoln wins and a period of slave liberation and movement towards equal rights on a federal level begins.
Right, but during the 20th century there was a pole shift in US political parties. To oversimplify a bit: FDR made the Dems the party of economic liberalism and Lyndon Johnson made them the party of civil rights (on which Johnson famously stated: "We've lost the South for a generation").