Loading summary
Transcript65 lines
- [00:01]
Annabe Sofa Advertiser
There's nothing like sinking into luxury. At washablesofas.com, you'll find the Annabe sofa which combines ultimate comfort and design at an affordable price. And get this, it's the only sofa that's fully machine washable from top to bottom. Starting at only $699. The stain resistant performance fabric slipcovers and cloud like frame duvet can go straight into your wash. Perfect for anyone with kids, pets or anyone who loves an easy to clean spotless sofa. With a modular design and changeable slipcovers, you can customize your sofa to fit any space and style. Whether you need a single chair, loveseat or a luxuriously large sectional, Annabe has you covered. Visit washablesofas.com to upgrade your home. Right now you can shop up to 60% off store wide with a 30 day money back guarantee. Shop now@washablesofas.com Add a little to your life. Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply. You can make a difference in someone's life, including your own with a job in home care. These jobs offer flexible schedules, health care, retirement options and free training. They also provide paid time off and opportunities for overtime. Visit oregonhomecarejobs.com to learn more and apply. That's oregonhomecarejobs.com.
- [01:30]
Ryan Seacrest
Hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway. It is hot out there this summer, right? But don't sweat it. We got tons of ways to save on your family's favorite personal care items to keep yourself feeling cool and smelling good. Now through September 9th, earn four times points when you shop for items from your favorite brands like Right Guard, Raw Sugar, Dove Soft Soap and Olay. Then use your points for discounts on groceries or gas on future purchases ON Offer end September 9th. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.
- [02:03]
Julian Zelizer
December 29th, 1975 Laguardia Airport the holiday rush.
- [02:09]
Law and Criminal Justice System Narrator
Parents hauling luggage. Kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then everything changed.
- [02:16]
Pharmaceutical Advertiser
There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal. Just a chaotic, chaotic scene.
- [02:22]
Law and Criminal Justice System Narrator
In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged. Terrorism. Listen to the new season of law and criminal justice System on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [02:40]
Bob Crawford
You've reached American History Hotline. You ask the questions, we get the answers. Leave a message. Hey there American History Hotliners. Your host Bob Crawford here. Happy to be joining you again for another episode of American History Hotline. You're the ones with the questions. I'm a guy trying to get you some answers. The best way to get us a question is to record a video or a voice memo on your phone and email it to AmericanHistoryHotlinEmail.com that's AmericanHistoryHotlinEmail.com and remember, we are the American history hotline. If you're thinking about the Roman Empire, you're on the wrong continent and in the wrong era. Okay, now to today's question, and it's one we've gotten from a few people.
- [03:29]
Julian Zelizer
Hi there. My name is Adam from Maryland. I teach 8th grade American history.
- [03:34]
Annabe Sofa Advertiser
This is Elaine from Washington, D.C. i.
- [03:36]
Julian Zelizer
Get this question from my students a lot.
- [03:38]
Annabe Sofa Advertiser
Which party would Lincoln most identify with today?
- [03:42]
Julian Zelizer
How does Lincoln's radical Republican party of the 1860s become the conservative Republican Party that we see today?
- [03:50]
Bob Crawford
Thanks, Elaine and Adam. I love this question. Here to help me answer it is Julian Zelizer. He's a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University and a New York Times bestselling author. His newest book is titled In Defense of Partisanship. And please check out his substack, the Longview. Julian, thanks for joining me today.
- [04:14]
Julian Zelizer
Thanks for having me.
- [04:16]
Bob Crawford
Okay, so first off, let's do a little primer on party politics. I know this is a, it's a tricky question to answer right now in particular, but pretend I've just arrived from outer space and I'm trying to understand our two main political parties. What are the major ideological differences?
- [04:37]
Julian Zelizer
I think the Republican Party in our era is a party that's anti government. It's a party that has become quite resistant to many social justice initiatives. And it's a party that increasingly is skeptical of international alliances and commitments, whereas Democrats remain a party of government. They believe government is fundamental to solving many problems. Problems. The Democratic Party still is more committed to traditional post war two international alliances. And finally, the Democratic Party, for all the divisions and hesitations, is still on board with the social revolution of the 1960s, the civil rights revolution, the feminist revolution, the immigration revolution, and even again with some more skepticism that has emerged represents those values in party politics.
- [05:34]
Bob Crawford
When I first saw this question, the first thing that popped into my head was not Abraham Lincoln, it was Richard Nixon. And I'm thinking, okay, when did the parties kind of change clothes, if you want to put it that way, in our recent era. And that was Nixon's Southern Strategy. From what you just said to me, they've changed clothes again in some ways. So first explain what that was and why that's important to this conversation today. And then talk about the new wardrobe that today's Republican Party, which you just outlined in some ways, has put on.
- [06:16]
Julian Zelizer
Yeah, I mean, I think the big change does come in the late 60s and early 70s. The Southern Strategy was basically the idea that more Republicans and conservatives start having. It starts actually in the early 50s. But the idea is that Republicans can form an alliance with Southern Democrats who were conservative, particularly on race relations. Also on unions. They opposed unions. And Republicans started to see that that was a fruitful alliance, either a bipartisan alliance, or ultimately a way to take over the electorate of the south by winning over Southern Democrats who no longer like their party. So this is the Southern Strategy. As Democrats become more favorable to civil rights, as Democrats become more aligned with unions, the Southern Republicans would emerge and become something which they had never been a serious force in Southern politics. And Richard Nixon, more than any other president and candidate in 1968, sees the potential of this because he is running and then governing after the Civil Rights act of 64, the Voting Rights act of 65, had caused many Southern Democrats to be quite upset with the direction of their party. So he makes a play for the South. He talks about issues like states rights. He talks about the limits of government. He doesn't talk explicitly about race, but that is underlying some of the appeal. And that's when the Southern Strategy really accelerates in a way that we hadn't seen in presidential politics. The last thing I'd say is in Congress, this Southern Strategy had been around really since the late 30s, when there was a coalition of Southern Democratic committee chairs and Republicans who had worked through the committee system since 1938 to block liberalism at every turn. But the Southern Strategy really refers to this presidential campaign idea. And ultimately, the goal is for Republicans to make the South a red area, in our modern parlance of color schemes.
- [08:28]
Bob Crawford
So that is culture. Social policy. Cultural policy. But when I think of the Republican Party today, I think of America first. I think of a foreign policy that is looking inward. Right. And also Nixon, wasn't he a New Deal? Maybe. Some say he's the last New Deal president. Right. Osha, epa, all these bureaucratic institutions. You know, he supported those and he instituted many of those. So how does the party get from even Nixon to. So that's a whole nother shift, right?
- [09:10]
Julian Zelizer
Yeah. I mean, there's two issues. On the latter point, he was conservative, and we have to remember he had a Democratic Congress, a strong Democratic Congress. That's all Congress had been since the 50s. And so he doesn't have a lot of leeway. A lot of these ideas, like the EPA are really coming from Democrats on the Hill and liberal Republicans who are still a thing at the time. And he often doesn't have a choice. So he was conservative, but it's all relative conservative. And for mainstream Republicans, in the late 60s and early 70s meant still accepting that government was going to have a big role in American life and working with Democrats to often start and implement new programs. And that's much different than where we are today. So I think part of it isn't that he wasn't a conservative, but the conservatism domestically becomes much more radical, much more rightward over the next few decades. On foreign policy, that's a huge shift. That's more recent in. In the 1970s, when you talked about the new conservative movement, people like Ronald Reagan who are coming onto the scene as national figures, one of their central arguments was we had to be very muscular overseas, that the United States had to work with allies and on its own to assert itself against the Soviet Union and China. And their idea of withdrawing was what they criticized Democrats for doing after Vietnam. That was the argument. Reagan was even critical of Nick Nixon and Gerald Ford because they practice something called the policy of detente, which was easing relations with the Soviets through negotiations over arms agreement. And Reagan even thought that was bad. So the America first wing was always in the Republican coalition, but it's really only in the last, you know, since 9, 11, since the war in Iraq, where it's become the dominant mode of Republican thinking.
- [11:11]
Bob Crawford
All right, as promised, let's get to Abraham Lincoln and his Republican Party. What were the major ideological stances, and where were most of the Republican voters in 1856, 1860?
- [11:24]
Julian Zelizer
I mean, it's complicated in that we don't want to say Abraham Lincoln was perfect. He was hesitant and too slow. Many argue on the issue of slavery. He gets there, but it takes a little while. But clearly we. What he represented by the end of his presidency, by his death and in that era was a party A, committed to union, B, ultimately committed to the abolition of slavery, and C, and this is post Lincoln, but it's still the party of Lincoln, committed to Reconstruction at some level, meaning a new union that not only did not have slavery, but had some kind of policies to help the freed black population and to create a more just society. That was the party of Lincoln. That's why many black Americans for decades would remain loyal to the GOP and never consider voting for Democrats who represented the party of the South. And that's the final Part the party of Lincoln was a Northern party. It represented the non south because of how it was formed and because of its role in, in the Civil War.
- [12:37]
Bob Crawford
The 1856 election, a lot of people were afraid to vote for the Republican party because upending the status quo by having a sectional party. It just seemed like Civil war would have come sooner. Many thought, what about the Democratic Party? You mentioned the Democratic Party of Lincoln's time. Talk about them and the complexities of that Democratic Party.
- [13:03]
Julian Zelizer
It was parties back then had many different coalitions, so it wasn't one thing. And you had Northern Democrats who really, ultimately really later in the 19th century would appeal to immigrants. And in a city like New York, Democrat didn't mean Dixiecrat, Democrat meant machine Democrat. And focusing on these new arrivals and power within the cities. But for, for I think a lot of the country, what Democrats meant in the wake of the Civil War was a party that was not committed to union, a party that was tied to the slave economy and ultimately a party that would help pick apart Reconstruction after Lincoln's death and pressure Republicans in a number of instances, culminating in 1877 with dismantling this vast program that meant to not only compensate but reconstruct American society after slavery and the Civil War. So Democrats were very much, for a while a Southern party again that would evolve and it would change by the 1930s. But that reputation was strong and with good reason.
- [14:16]
Bob Crawford
This is American History Hotline. I'm your host Bob Crawford. Today my guest is Julian Zelizer. He's a New York Times bestselling author. His newest book is Is In Defense of Partisanship. We're talking about the Democratic and Republican Party realignment of the mid 20th century. What you just said, parties evolve and change. So it's not like, I mean, well, it's kind of. It seems abrupt. I think of tariffs, I think of Trump and tariffs. And that seems like an abrupt switch for a major political party to make. I mean like a light switch. Switch.
- [14:57]
Julian Zelizer
Yeah, I mean, I think that's a good point. And there's different kinds of changes. I mean, I've been working on, I'm working on a substack I have now called the Longview. And it's constantly wrestling with that duality. Meaning there are certain things that happen in American politics which rightly are seen as dramatic and quick. And an issue like the tariff with where the Republicans have moved from staunchly being a free trade party really through certainly George W. Bush, where it was very marginal. Anyone who would think not of one tariff, but of an entire tariff regime to where we are today. And part of that is Trump. This is someone who has been obsessed with this and now has the power after decades to put it into place. But other parts, I think, have been slow, kind of a slow burn, and they've been taking place slowly. So you can also look at Trump's departure from these international alliances like NATO, and that's been building up over the decades. I mean, even in the Reagan era, you see more skepticism toward members of NATO complaints. They don't pay enough. George W. Bush, who's the president during 9 11, is willing to go his own way to, even though he does still want support from his allies. And you have more voices within the GOP organizations and conservative groups who are more critical of that. And so that's more. It's finally finding the president who will represent how the party had been changing, rather than being nostalgic and trying to do something. But with the tariffs, I think it's rightfully a pretty big shift, and it's not surprising. That's one area you've seen more Republican private grumbling, but even some public grumbling. Not only the economic effects, but this is not what a lot of the party stands for.
- [16:51]
Bob Crawford
Well, I mean, many of these congressmen in the numbering in the hundreds, ran ads, free trade ads, you know, within the past several cycles. And now they have to go back to their constituents and say, everything I believed pre2024 has now changed.
- [17:10]
Julian Zelizer
And it's like NAFTA when that passed, which has been the heart of the complaint for many people who are supportive of the tariffs. That happens first under George H.W. bush, a Republican. He gets it underway and gets the agreement in place. Then President Clinton is the president when that gets ratified. But he works with Republicans in Congress. Democrats are against it, but people like Newt Gingrich, who at the time, they are the radical in the group, they are the ones who work with him, to the consternation of many Democrats, to get this agreement through because they believe that free trade is a good thing without many restrictions. So it is unbelievable to see the party and watch the party as they wrestle with really a contradiction of their own history.
- [18:00]
Bob Crawford
So what I'm getting from everything that you've said is parties wrestle with these two forces. You have tradition and then you have the changing times. Right? The moments I just, I think of this country since 9 11, or really since the 2000 election and how dramatically this first 25 years of this century have been. So talk about that, talk about the tradition of parties. Because your book in defense of partisanship, you really. That is a. For anybody who's listening today who wants to learn more about the evolution and change of parties in Congress, that is a roadmap for everything we're talking about.
- [18:46]
Julian Zelizer
Yes, I try to do that. And look, we, we are in an age where people think what a party is today is always what it's been. But these are institutions, organizations, they have a history of their own. And while people love to talk about third parties all the time, will there be a new third party? I'm asked that constantly. What's, I think more interesting and more realistic is how do parties change internally and they can change in terms of the coalition. So Democrats until the 1970s and 80s were really a party where the weight of leadership was in the South. And even as northern liberals became more influential, it was the Southern Democrat who was the face of the party. Fast forward to today. It's hard to find many southern Democrats. And when Democrats win in a state like Georgia, it's a surprise as opposed to a predicted outcome. Their ideologies change over time. I think that's what we're talking about. Republicans, certainly since Reagan, were really a free trade party. They were for open commerce. They weren't for government interfering in business. And that has changed over time in terms of a policy position to where we are today, where it's not only tariffs, it's a heavy hand of government making decisions about what will or will not happen with the economy. And then finally, it's just broader coalitions change. You know, labor was a huge part of the Democratic coalition from the 30s to the 70s. It no longer is. That coalition now rests on groups and organizations that represent suburban voters and coastal issues, including. Including the environment. It's not a coastal issue, but that's where support is. So on all fronts, parties constantly evolve. They, they will again, these are not static creatures. And I think that's where the fights really take place. It again, there's lots of third party conversation, but the real interesting issue is what's going on within the parties and where is there space for big changes. I'll conclude there by saying, you know, you're seeing the Republicans since the 70s, since Nixon talked about a silent majority have been trying to win over more and more disaffected Democratic voters. For Nixon and Reagan, it was white ethnic voters in cities who were still pretty liberal on social issues, on economic issues, often union members, but didn't like the civil rights movement revolution. They were uncomfortable with feminism and environmentalism for different reasons. And now I think Trump has really finished that shift and brought many white working class voters, particularly rural male voters, into the coalition. So that's a long term change that he has perfected and finished. And I think those are the questions we really need to look at in party politics.
- [21:47]
Bob Crawford
Who's driving that change? Right. Trump is a, I mean, a once in a lifetime charismatic figure. Right. Love him or hate him, he is consequential. So is party change typically driven by the voters or by the elected officials?
- [22:05]
Julian Zelizer
Both. I mean, it's a historian's answer, but it's both. I don't think it's one individual, though. I, I never think that's the answer. But if you think of the Republican Party and how they moved in, in that direction, you could think first of just an electoral response to civil rights since the 60s, which over time did erode some support from white voters whose economic interests were still with the Democrats. But that issue really was important. And added to that were other social issues right through this day with the trans ad in 2024. And so that isn't an individual, it's an electorate. Gradually, parts of an electorate responding to changes in public policy, to changes in national politics. But then there are leaders. Presidents are the most well known, but legislators are important who capitalize on this and figure out how do you get that vote. Reagan was very good at it, partly through his charisma and his vision, partly through his appeal to these issues much more subtly than President Trump talking about welfare queens as a way to kind of tap into some of that anger, opposition to busing, all of that. And that has been a series of leaders. The Tea Party in Congress you could think of, has been very effective at continuing to work that room, so to speak, in politics, and culminating with Trump's, you know, you can't have it from one direction only. I think that's when the big changes happen. The leaders match up and sync up with changing electoral preferences and sometimes stimulate and energize those elements. But they're not just making it out of fresh air usually.
- [23:53]
Bob Crawford
It's just hard to believe, Julian, that welfare queens is now considered subtle.
- [23:59]
Julian Zelizer
Yes, I mean, we've seen a radicalization in Republican politics. The things that are said today, certainly by President Trump would have not been either acceptable in 1980s Republicans politics, or at a minimum, politically tolerable. There's a famous interview with Lee Atwater, who is a big political operative who ran parts of Reagan's campaign, ran famously George H.W. bush's 1988 campaign. He does a very candid interview at one point where he becomes more apologetic by the end of his life, where he talks really explicitly how Republicans figured out ways to talk about race in code words, states rights, he says, was a way to talk about it without talking about it. And so it wasn't not deliberative in how they did this and thought about it. But what we've seen is some of those guardrails, whether they're moral, ethical or whether just political, have fallen away. And I don't think Republicans in 2025 feel the need to be very subtle about some of these issues. On immigration, even the rhetoric that President Trump uses, let alone the policies, are so extreme that it's hard to fathom that Ronald Reagan, who passes with Democrats a bill, who supports a bill that comes out in 86 that provides amnesty to, I think over a million persons who are living here, that he would ever talk that way. And I think that change has been really, really significant and it's very defining right now. And I don't think Republicans can escape it anymore. They are this is the party.
- [25:40]
Annabe Sofa Advertiser
Life's messy. We're talking spills, stains, pets and kids. But with Annabe, you never have to stress about messes again. @washablesofas.com Discussion Discover Anibe Sofas, the only fully machine washable sofas inside and out, starting at just $699. Made with liquid and stain resistant fabrics, that means fewer stains and more peace of mind. Designed for real life, our sofas feature changeable fabric covers allowing you to refresh your style anytime. Need flexibility? Our modular design lets you rearrange your sofa effortlessly. Perfect for cozy apartments or spacious homes. Plus, they're earth friendly and built to last. That's why over 200,000 happy customers have made the switch. Upgrade your space today. Visit washablesofas.com now and bring home a sofa made for life. That's washablesofas.com offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply. You can make a difference in someone's life, including your own, with a job in home care. These jobs offer flexible schedules, health care, retirement options and free training. They also provide paid time off and opportunities for overtime. Visit oregonhomecarejobs.com to learn more and apply. That's oregonhomecarejobs.com.
- [27:09]
Ryan Seacrest
Hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway. It is hot out there this summer, right? But don't sweat it. We got tons of ways to save on your family's favorite personal care items to keep yourself feeling cool and smelling good. Now through September 9th, earn four times points when you shop for items from your favorite brands like Right Guard, Raw Sugar, Dove Soft Soap and Olay. Then use your points for discounts on groceries or gas on future purchases. Offer end September 9th. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.
- [27:43]
Julian Zelizer
December 29, 1975 LaGuardia Airport the holiday rush.
- [27:50]
Law and Criminal Justice System Narrator
Parents hauling luggage. Kids gripping their new Christmas toys. Then at 6:33pm everything changed.
- [28:00]
Pharmaceutical Advertiser
There's been a bombing at the TWA terminal.
- [28:03]
Julian Zelizer
Apparently the explosion actually impelled metal glass.
- [28:09]
Pharmaceutical Advertiser
The injured were being loaded into ambulances. Just a chaotic, chaotic scene.
- [28:14]
Law and Criminal Justice System Narrator
In its wake, a new kind of enemy emerged. And it was here to stay. Terrorism, Law and Criminal Justice System is back in season two. We're turning our focus to a threat that hides in plain sight that's harder to predict and even harder to stop. Listen to the new season of Law and Criminal Justice System on the iHeartrade radio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [28:50]
Bob Crawford
This is American History Hotline. I'm your host Bob Crawford. Today my guest is Julian Zelizer. He's a New York Times best selling author. His newest book is In Defense of Partisanship and his substack is the Long View. We're talking about political parties and how they've changed over time. Julian, we've talked a lot about the Republican Party of today. What about the Democratic Party of today?
- [29:16]
Julian Zelizer
The Democrats have changed too. I mean, I think in terms of the electorate, it's not untrue that over the last few decades the suburban college educated voter has become much more important in terms of dictating the party's preferences. And coastal Democrats have become more important than they had been back even in the 1950s and 60s. If you hear Lyndon Johnson in the 60s, he's really thinking of union voters in a state like Michigan or Wisconsin and really focused on them. In addition to Southern Democrats who despite civil rights, he still fought on government issues outside of that were still supportive. Whereas today that red blue map and those blue areas that are concentrated on the coast really are important parts of the electorate. I think a second area Democrats on economic issues, it's a fair argument that the leadership has moved to the center since Bill Clinton. I think really, really Jimmy Carter, I should say since they started to push away from some of the philosophy of the New Deal and embraced some of Reaganism, some people call it neoliberalism as a kind of not quite right wing conservative, but an acceptance that Markets are quite important in public policy and on international policy, it's been messy. It's not that different where the party was. I actually think they're more internationalist Democrats today than they were in the 70s after Vietnam. They. They've been recommitted to these institutions and to the idea that the US should have a presence overseas. But at the most basic level, I think Democrats still just remain the party of FDR in that it's still a commitment to federal government intervention, both on economic issues, on social issues, and at some level overseas. And that's the constant part of where the party is. And it really, I think, shapes a lot of the party's character, because ultimately they are committed to the ability to govern, and they can't get away from that. And that leads them to compromise more, to be a little more pragmatic and not so extreme in their politics. That's how the party's both changed. In a core area, they've remained the same.
- [31:39]
Bob Crawford
Do they need to change? It seems like since the election 2024, or since election night, the media landscape seems to be putting a lot of blame on the Democratic Party or putting a lot of weight on the party's failure to connect with voters recently. Is that overblown?
- [32:02]
Julian Zelizer
I tend to think so. I mean, look after an election where the loss is this serious, and it is a serious loss, even though it's not a landslide, any party would be foolhardy not to think of how they can improve and do better and not to look at the mistakes they made otherwise. They can easily recreate the same loss in four years. But that's different than saying it's a crisis. You have to overhaul everything. This is a party that still has a pretty big electoral reach. It's a party that won in 2020. In 2024, they lost, but they were not decimated. It was still the same map where you don't have a landslide for President Trump in the Electoral College. He had a plurality, not a majority, in the vote. And so. And on top of it, we had this. If you read all these new books that are coming out about the election, you remember the situation was truly unusual. The candidate withdrew after essentially collapsing on a televised debate. And the next candidate was not only as vice president, which is very difficult to run in the best of conditions, but she had weeks to get this thing undergoing, and it's a she. And her social identity makes it hard in this country. So in some ways, she did pretty well, and the Democrats didn't do so poorly. So I Don't know. I think thinking of an overhaul at this point misses some of the underlying strength. Look, if they can appeal more to working American white voters who, again, still should be sympathetic to Democratic economic policies, they should think of how to do that. They should think of how to become more appealing to young voters who still are pretty sympathetic to, I think, most of what the Democratic Party is about, and you're seeing it in the first wave of Trump polls. We're indicating a lot of the support from these groups is already weakening after his first hundred days. And so there might be room for Democrats to do that. And obviously finding candidates who don't necessarily represent a totally new vision for the party, but are exciting, energetic, appealing, I think that's what they should be focused on as opposed to re envisioning everything. That's my take on the election. It just comes back to the fact this was still a. A post 1984, meaning post the final landslide election that we've had kind of election. It's one on the margins. That doesn't mean a party has imploded. It means a party can do better.
- [34:38]
Bob Crawford
So let's go back about 230 years. George Washington, I'm thinking of his farewell address. What did he tell the American people warn the American people of when it comes to political parties? Because, Julian, political parties, they're the centerpiece of American government.
- [34:58]
Julian Zelizer
Right.
- [34:59]
Bob Crawford
And what did the man above all party say about parties?
- [35:03]
Julian Zelizer
Look, the founders of the country, most of them, and Washington as the first president, were fearful of parties. And he warns against what these kinds of divisions will do to the country. And there was a fear of what they called faction and how we had to essentially remain focused on being a nation, a republic, as opposed to a divided party. The problem was it didn't really work out that way. We had parties from day one. We have divisions in this country, and parties have represented them. And I think there's a very good argument, and obviously I've helped make this too, that parties have served a function, they have represented those differences, and when they work well, they're a healthy institution, and that's why they've been here forever. And they're the best thing we have at this point in dealing with these divisions. But the warning still matters. I mean, I think, look, it's aspirational, and that's still relevant. And you want presidents who push against the divisions, even if those divisions will exist. I think that's a good thing. And that's part of the function of the president is even as we're tearing ourselves apart. And we are on many issues where we don't agree. Reproductive rights is an example. Taxes, war. War. It's good to have leaders who say, all right, everyone, come back into the room now and let's just take a deep breath before we go out for round two. But that was part of the warning. It was a warning against faction. But Washington also makes another warning, which today I think deserves more attention. And simply by stepping down, he was warning against the potential for centralized, unchecked power in our system. That concerned him very much. He did not want a monarch in this country that was important to the founders. That was important in Washington's addresses, and it was important in what he did by giving up power. He gave up power at the very start, when he was a very popular, beloved figure in American politics. And that's the warning for me. More than the party division, which I think, again, was just aspirational, that's very real and touched on something that we have seen and we're seeing is very dangerous when we centralize too much power and put it in the hands of a person, in this case who won't give it up or won't give it up easily.
- [37:25]
Bob Crawford
Real quick, what is the likelihood that President Trump could mount a third a campaign for a third term?
- [37:34]
Julian Zelizer
My rule of thumb is if he says he's going to do something, I believe he's going to do it, and maybe he won't. But it's a very serious possibility. It totally contradicts the intention of the 22nd Amendment. I think there's very good clarity. Maybe he's going to wordsmith how he does it or do one of these, you know, I'll run for vice president, that personal step down, and there I am again. But I think it should be taken seriously. I mean, we see at the start of Trump 2.0 very dramatic and bold actions that threaten and challenge the legitimacy of the court and the Constitution, frankly. I mean, he jettisoned due process right off the bat with his deportations and doesn't seem to really care. So why wouldn't he? If he wants, and he might not want to in a few years, we'll see how this all goes. But I think we should expect it could be a reality. And I think politicians have a constitutional argument against it, so they should be working or thinking about what to do in the meantime to prepare for that. But it's a very real possibility.
- [38:41]
Bob Crawford
Well, from one ridiculous question to a final ridiculous question, forgive my premise, but just to button this up, we're going to rerun the 1860 election in today and Abraham Lincoln is going to run. Does he run as a Republican or does he run as a Democrat?
- [39:02]
Julian Zelizer
I mean, if he was, it's always hard to imagine what he would even be thinking. But there's so many changes in American society since, and even the size of the government he didn't imagine, couldn't have imagined. But I would say if he was running today in these political parties, he would fit much more comfortably in where the Democratic Party is than the Republican Party and certainly the Republican Party of Trump. The party of Trump is what it is right now. It's hard to envision, given what he did and given the battle he fought for the union and ultimately to end this terrible institution that he would, you know, feel like the GOP is his party anymore. That's obviously speculation, counterfactual history, but that is how I would react and I think many other people would react to that question.
- [39:54]
Bob Crawford
I've been talking to Julian Zelizer. He's a professor of history and Public affairs at Princeton University. He's also a New York Times bestselling author of many, many books. His latest is titled In Defense of Partisanship and his substack is the Longview. Please check it out. Julian, thanks for joining us today on American History Hotline.
- [40:17]
Julian Zelizer
Thanks for having me. It's been great.
- [40:20]
Bob Crawford
You've been listening to American History Hotline, a production of Iheart Podcasts and Scratch Track Productions. The show's executive producer is James Morrison. Our executive producers from Iheart are Jordan Runtal and Jason English. Original music composed by me, Bob Crawford. Please keep in touch. Our email is american history hotlinemail.com if you like the show, please tell your friends and leave us a review in Apple Podcasts. I'm your host Bob Crawford. Feel free to hit me up on social media to ask a history question or to let me know what you think of the show. You can find me at bobcrawford Bass. Thanks so much for listening. See you next week.
- [41:19]
Annabe Sofa Advertiser
Life's messy. We're talking spills, stains, pets and kids. But with Anabe you never have to stress about messes again. At washablesofas.com, discover Anabe Sofas. The only fully machine washable sofas inside, inside and out starting at just $699. Made with liquid and stain resistant fabrics. That means fewer stains and more peace of mind. Designed for real life, our sofas feature changeable fabric covers allowing you to refresh your style anytime. Need flexibility? Our modular design lets you rearrange your sofa effortlessly. Perfect for cozy apartments or spacious homes, plus their earth friendly and built to last. That's why over 200,000 happy customers have made the switch. Upgrade your space today. Visit washablesofas.com now and bring home a sofa made for life. That's washablesofas.com offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.
- [42:18]
Pharmaceutical Advertiser
Our partner Eli Lilly & Co. Just announced duets for type 2 diabetes, a campaign celebrating real patient stories of support because managing type 2 diabetes doesn't have to be a solo act. Share your story@mounjaro.com duets mounjaro tirzepatide is an injectable prescription medicine that is used along with diet and exercise to improve blood sugar glucose in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Mounjaro is not for use in children. Don't take Mounjaro if you're allergic to it or if you or someone in your family had medullary thyroid cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome, type 2. Stop and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain or vision changes. Serious side effects may include inflamed pancreas and gallbladder problems. Taking Mounjaro with a sulfonylnorrhea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. Tell your doctor if you're nursing pregnant, plan to be or taking birth control pills and before scheduled procedures with anesthesia. Side effects include nausea, diarrhea and vomiting, which can cause dehydration and may cause kidney problems. Once weekly. Mounjaro is available by prescription only in 2.5, 5, 6, 7.5, 10, 12.5 and 15 milligrams per 0.5 milliliter injection. Call 1-800-LILYRX 800-545-5979 or visit mountjaro.lilly.com for the Mountjaro indication and safety summary with warnings. Talk to your doctor for more information about Mounjaro. Mountjaro and its delivery device base are registered trademarks owned or licensed by eli Lilly & Company, its subsidiaries or affiliates.
- [43:48]
Julian Zelizer
Talk about stepping up. It's time to level up your game. Introducing the all new ESPN app.
- [43:56]
Ryan Seacrest
All of ESPN all in one place.
- [43:58]
Julian Zelizer
Your home for the most live sports.
- [44:00]
Ryan Seacrest
And the best championship moments. The electricity is palpable.
- [44:05]
Julian Zelizer
Step up your game with no annual contract required. It's the ultimate fan experience. Level up.
- [44:11]
Ryan Seacrest
For more on the ESPN app or or at stream.espn.com sign up now. Hey, it's Ryan Seacrest for Albertsons and Safeway. Feel good and look good this summer with savings on your personal care favorites and earn four times points now through September 9th. Shop in store or online for items like Dollar Shave Club razors, hydro Silk Razors and Edge Shave Gel, plus some favorite brands like Tampax, Pearl, Depend and Poise to earn four Times points to use for later discounts on groceries or gas. Hurry in before these deals are gone. Offer end September 9th. Restrictions apply. Offers may vary. Visit albertsons or safeway.com for more details.