Timeline of US Political Parties

[@UsefulCharts]

Go to ground.news/charts to get all sides of every story during the 2024 US elections. Subscribe through my link to save 50% off unlimited access.

[@Milton_Friedmanite]

How on earth do you have “Reduce income taxes for the rich and increase for the poor” labeled on the Republican Party??? This is a bad caricature of the party and has 0 basis in reality. The Republicans party has never said they want 1) to raise income taxes for the poor and 2) lower income taxes for only the rich The position has always been to decrease income taxes for ALL. If you read up on the history of supply-siders/Chicago school of economics then you’ll know this is true.

[@ChristopherCurtis]

@@Milton_Friedmanite You can say that Rs say they don't want to increase taxes on those who are not wealthy, but that's what they do. It has more basis in reality than the propaganda. But I was here to comment on CNN being labeled a "left-wing/progressive" news source.

[@joshuataylor3550]

Vote Harris 🗳

[@ChristopherCurtis]

@Matt Baker: On another channel, the author invited people to talk about politics. The chat immediately filled with people saying their comments were being deleted. We figured out they were being "shadow banned" to the "Newest first" section of "Sort by", where threads get lost. My first comment in this thread is now only visible under "Newest first". I asked Ryan if I was being downvoted into oblivion but I don't think he saw it because there are thousands of comments now. Can you shed any light on the subject? Thanks if you can help.

[@nooneofconsequence1251]

the moment you identify CNN as left wing was when I knew the video wasn't really grounded in reality. Ground News isn't, either.

[@TheOneWhoMightBe]

The old chart is quite appealing. Plenty of information packed into it but not overwhelming. And much easier on the eyes that the newer charts which are just straight lines.

[@DavidJohnRedwood]

Agree 👍

[@freddielo4330]

Agree, the curves really gave it a sense of “trend” where you can see the popularity starting to move up and down

[@Alex_-oc4bt]

it added a human element to the chart. the new charts are just soulless

[@cuidadocomomatheus]

this chart feels fun to look at

[@iammrbeat]

This is simply amazing.

[@DoodleDooAnimations]

I Agree!

[@Erner749]

You are amazing

[@isaac502i3]

hi Mr beat!!!

[@morenomacaluso7364]

Hello mr.beat

[@LordGeneralOHara]

Mr breast give me money

[@thethreerailwayengines825]

Quick correction: in 1872, saying the Liberal Republicans supported the Democrat candidate is misleading. The Liberal Republicans chose their own candidate, and the Democrats then chose to back HIM in order to avoid splitting the opposition to the Republican President Grant

[@anschelsc]

Yeah, Horace Greeley was never a Democrat

[@aguyontheinternet8436]

that's pretty cool actually, you don't see coordinated candidate targeting that's _that_ well planned out nowadays

[@anschelsc]

@@aguyontheinternet8436 It's been a long time since there was a party so utterly certain to lose as the post-civil-war Democrats

[@TheLoneWolf_1013]

Correction: it was a DEMOCRAT leader who first pushed for that candidate, before the liberals chose him. So it was the liberals following the democrats, as initially stated!

[@ericarobbin]

Awesome map! 

Also I'd add: *1.* ”Only white males voted in the 18th century” is an over-generalization. Voting rights were based on property ownership as criteria and the reasons behind it as a resulting societal demographic because of where they geographically came from. Plus, property ownership was typically viewed in light of citizenship verification, as a stakeholder of sorts. *2.* “Women fought for the right to vote” is inaccurate. They actually HAD the right to vote. And women DID vote. In fact, 100 years BEFORE the 19th Amendment. Lydia Chapin Taft for example, voted in 1756. The 19th Amendment says, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.” The right of women to vote was “guaranteed,” in 1920, as in protected, NOT granted. There is a difference. A lot of people confuse the principles of U.S. founding documents, which basically recognizes through the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” Essentially starts man at 0 on the scale of having the most freedom ever conceived of. The Constitution and Amendments, is written from the perspective of limiting the government, and so by nature, any additional legislation (laws) will always limit the freedom of man over one another, and expand the role of the government through every policy written since. *3.* The Know Nothings. 

Where the party was coming from was in attempt to avoid religious imposition and possible tyranny, (like what happened during the Crusades, the reign of Queen Isabella of Spain, amongst others). As well recognizing the suppression of widespread access to Bibles and personal exploration of them outside of certain formal church teachings. To represent those who wanted to source their doctrine and theology outside of the authority of the Papacy and to practice other beliefs they held as true. The Know Nothing decree states “That the Bible in the hands of every free citizen is the only permanent basis of all true liberty and genuine equality.” I’m not opening up the religious debate, people can research for themselves, I’m just making a point because of the verbiage used, leading to “anti-“ where the bigger context was left out, in the party's vocal attempt to preserve national sovereignty and religious freedom from imposing sources who didn’t share the same values and the fear of them possibly taking over. Sources: -The Know Nothing Party, 1856 -Divino Afflante Spiritu (September 30, 1943) | PIUS XII, Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu of Pius XII, 30 September 1943 -A Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Anterior to the Division of the East and West, The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem -Catechisms of the Catholic Church, p. 214, for those who want to read about the Catholic as "the true church" claims for reference -Catechisms of the Catholic Church, Of the Pope, "He receives the divine assistance promised by Christ to the Church when he defines infallibly a doctrine of faith or morals." *4.* Also a really interesting political idea is Moderates VS Radicals. I recommend people to check them out, because during the Revolution, there was another set of factions, who were very notable in shaping military power, diplomacy, and foreign policy. Great YT video that explains: Moderates vs. Radicals in the Diplomacy of the American Revolution | Robert W. Smith American Revolution Institute *6.* Those who would like insight into early personal beliefs and ideals, party identity, and policy in action, in the outlook of times past, the Tea Act of 1773, as it relates to trade relations, is a perfect example. Great YT video that explains: The British East India Company and the Origins of the American Revolution | James Vaughn

[@Harleb-vr1bz]

I showed this to my father who is a political scientist, Now he wants me to get him a poster of it for his office.

[@ilesalmo7724]

In the info of this video was a link to it

[@Rimaku0]

Looks like the best option is to download the scan and get it printed yourself

[@Imperial_Squid]

With just a couple of months until Christmas, that's great timing lol

[@armastat]

Ask your father why he has never heard of this chart --- You would think such an amazing tool would be well known when he was being taught POL-SCI right? I am pretty sure that somewhere along the line some politically inclined person disagreed with 'something' in the chart and it was suppressed... In other words we have had rogue individuals and a deep state for centuries lol. (only difference now is our advanced communications allow them to work together, or at least in a flock like coordination)

[@hamnchee]

Man I spidey sensed that ground news ad coming a mile away.

[@georhodiumgeo9827]

A ground news ad is just youtube telling you that you are well informed.

[@RubelliteFae]

Ground News, where liberal = left and leftists don't exist.

[@RubelliteFae]

Ground News, where liberal is left and proper leftists don't exist.

[@rotaryenginepete]

@@georhodiumgeo9827 exactly. grand scale gaslighting.

[@TheCriminalViolin]

It couldn't have been more obvious.

[@MoonThuli]

You could argue that the American Tories survived in Canada, and eventually became the Conservative party of Canada.

[@AmericaIsACountry]

But that isn't US politics now, is it?

[@W1LLi4m_]

@@AmericaIsACountryCanadians have no identity, so they obsess with American culture.

[@daiichidoku]

sadly, its line would merge with the liberal party's line in the 70s, as would the ndp and greens soon after. ironic that its original iteration's name was the "Liberal-Conservative" party. the LibCons. applies today as well.

[@Rydonattelo]

I'm not sure about Canada but I know that in Australia the conservative party are still called " Tory "

[@jasonkoch3182]

Yes, we will definitely discuss Canadian parties in a video about US parties.

[@ruyfernandez]

It's so weir for me, as a non-American, to see right-wing in red and left-wing in blue.

[@rileynewman1171]

It's because of a 1980 news coverage of the 1980 election. I forgot what station but they wanted there map to stand out so the decided to use red because reagan republican red. And then blue for the democrats

[@W1LLi4m_]

It is very weird, red being the colour of the socialist religion worldwide.

[@FanFive5]

Yeah. It produces some unconscious associations towards each party. Red is kinda an action-y warlike color and blue is kinda of a peaceful objective color. Sometimes this matches party policies, sometimes it doesn't. Also, Red is also associated with communists and modern Republicans are nearly directly opposite communism on the spectrum.

[@Meton2526]

@@FanFive5 Although I find it quite amusing that during the 20th century, the Republicans were the iconic anti-Soviet communism party; just look up the history of Joe McCarthy trying to investigate people in the government who had security clearances that were compromised by Soviet espionage activities, the Republicans backed him, and the Democrats fought incredible propaganda campaigns against him. Now we have Putin, a former KGB operative, running the same kind of propaganda campaigns in English media, and the Republicans are eating it up while the Democrats are .... also eating it up, but much less so, and are much more supportive of Ukraine against the Russian aggression.

[@FSMDog]

@@W1LLi4m_ Calling socialism a religion betrays your POV Religions are about beliefs in deities...

[@PladArvion]

5:08 It's such a small detail, but I'm glad I saw it

[@aguyontheinternet8436]

the poor king lol

[@obamabinladen4109]

that's not where they cut it tho 😂... i hope

[@KomalPatel]

YES @the editor we notice and we love you for that 😂

[@jrak193]

same with Hamilton getting shot less than a minute before that

[@domv9225]

Don't lose your head if you can't see it. Just watch it again

[@Vonebor]

Love the gunshot sound effect when Alexander Hamilton's picture disappears and the separation of the French king's head on his exit. Editor had fun with this one! 😂

[@jaceandjace1171]

Glad I’m not the only one that noticed that 😂

[@isurrender3640]

That chart was up in my US history class in high school. I always spent a lot of time looking over at it when I was bored. It really helped teach me a lot about the history of political parties in America. Very nostalgic video for sure.

[@armastat]

Give it up for the Illustrators of the past. they were 'artistic' as opposed to 'standardized'.

[@gljames24]

Alexander Hamilton wrote an article of confederation that explicitly described how parties were inevitable because there are always going to be interest groups. Unlike what George Washington wanted, Alexander knew it was inevitable and created the first party 17 years later. We should've recognized that parties would exist, but instead pushed to reduce their power using Ranked Choice Voting and Mixed Memeber Proportional Districting, but those concepts didn't exist at the time as political theory for democracy/republics was not as advanced as it is now.

[@dashiellgillingham4579]

Most modern knowledge about what democracy is came from nationwide experiments based on the experiments of small towns in the United States. Marx cites Quakers, Evil Pinwheel Man cites the Trail of Tears, Keyes cites Henry Ford, etc etc. The Founders only had Roman rehashing of Spartan propaganda about why Athens was a total loser, and Kings being furious that Venice's polycracy could beat them, and Enlightenment Ethics that they suddenly had to apply to a situation in which they would have no King going forward. And, allegedly, a Haudenosaunee (the oldest known modern democracy at 550 years and counting) delegation in the attic giving them oral precedent for things the archaic British colonial laws never once had to deal with. So they just used their available evidence, mostly that Rome and Parliament lasted a really long time and both used first past the post systems, to make the most stable foundation they could reasonably guess would work.

[@danielzhang1916]

Washington didn't want parties to tear the country apart, but he himself supported the Federalists, I don't know if RCV would have worked back then, most countries didn't have that until much later, when things were more stable

[@gorkyd7912]

I don't think ranked choice voting solves the problem created by parties, it's just a way for multiple smaller parties to work together to disenfranchise the majority party.

[@ryaandnice]

Ranked choice voting! That would be a boon. It'd keep both parties honest instead of devolving into "well at least we aren't THEM".

[@armastat]

Just make it illegal for politicians to speak publicly outside of the congress. problem solved. lol

[@kevinkerkhoff6670]

4:32 Well that's it for Hamilton

[@zarajday]

I love this map so much. At first, when I saw it, I thought it was just stylized with the snake-like lines twisting, but after a minute, I realized it was ordering the lines of who won the elections, and I think it is beautiful. Also, this map explained to me the era of good feelings in a way I actually understand, with all the lines converging than history class ever did.

[@mondegreen9709]

I'm curious to find out where that area of good feelings is located, so I can go there too. I wonder if it has a zip code.

[@armastat]

Now you know where Kamala and her group got the 'Good Feeling' line they were trying to express about their political movement in the last days of the 2024 election ... they considered themselves the harbingers of a similar period. Which was totally delusional, if you looked at the details of that time its obvious that their stance was just like the losing one.

[@jeffbertjeffbertson4805]

Super interesting chart considering its age. Really like how it’s laid out

[@danielzhang1916]

I think it was based off of vines or rivers, a lot of old charts were like that

[@armastat]

Its Analog - vs Digital of today

[@unionofsa]

Note that other nations view left and right wing differently, in the UK a Liberal and a Conservative are both on the right and a Socialist is on the left. In the US the term Liberal is used for people on the left.

[@gabrielamora6265]

Well if you compared a lot of democrat politicians to politicians from other countries they don’t look so left wing.

[@saberswordsmen1]

Honestly, less true post New Labour. While it didn't die as thoroughly as in the US, both Democrats and Labour made the shift in the 90s towards neoliberalism. Corbyn represented an attempt to bring their roots back, and it isn't dead yet, but I don't think anyone can say it represents Labour at large. And they still refer to Labour as the left wing party in spite of that. At least that's my take as a non-British citizen.

[@nightflame389]

@@gabrielamora6265 That's only economically speaking. _Socially_ speaking, the Democratic Party is on the Left There's also the Authoritarian-Libertarian scale tl;dr politics is confusing

[@gabrielamora6265]

@ I am not confused, the Democratic Party merely makes token gestures to pretend to be left wing in terms of economic policy. They are pro corporate and capitalist. That’s hardly left wing in the rest of the world.

[@armastat]

Thats not actually true. We use the term liberal for 'many' people on the left because that is where most of them 'are'. Liberal/Conservative, Left/Right, Democrat/Republican, etc.,, are all completely different things with diff3erent definitions. but like a Venn-Diagram there are overlaps since you can have things like a liberal-democrat as well as a liberal-republican. And each of them not having same policies as the other. One way to visualize this is that each party is an object and each member inside are of different colors orother properties.

[@billusher2265]

Please make a charts for the development of the sciences

[@ms.donaldson2533]

Sadly, for Americans that begins with the creation of the National Science Academy in the 1860s. I live in CHARM City with "The experts" of science at Johns Hopkins. Once you really study the history, you find that it is created fantasy - like scientific evidence for the "Non-binary Movement" and "Gender Studies" were CREATED in the 1950s by John Money. Non-of it was real until someone realized they could profit from it. Just look up "The Father of" and fill in the rest with whatever you want. ❤ Much love from Charm City

[@jkarnold100]

Love this idea, I’ve been reading a book about the history of different sciences and whatnot (‘The Science Book’ that was in a curiosity box)

[@samcavanagh7993]

That would be super interesting

[@alaggiolaurino5235]

Love this idea! Especially if it includes defunct/pseudosciences.

[@RubelliteFae]

I'd like to see this, but only if it's geographically neutral. In Western education so much gets left out about non-Western contributions to the history of the sciences that it's somewhat cumbersome to properly research.

[@JD_Wilcox]

That is a cool chart. They crammed in so much information into it. I'd love to see a version that continued on to today.

[@heathab1539]

This chart is simply beautiful, id love so see it continued

[@Benzinilinguine]

Give it time?

[@chancellorjake]

Smoothest ad transition possible.

[@JohnnyAngel8]

It was so smooth I almost didn't see it coming until a moment before it began.

[@dloorkour1256]

Too bad it wrongly described the centrist CNN and the "both sides" NY Times as liberal.

[@dark666105]

I would love to see this chart continued to current day in the same style!

[@shehannanayakkara4162]

Kinda cool that they predicted the future colour of the Republicans being red (if I recall correctly, the association between the Republicans and red only became a thing after the 2000 election).

[@QuarioQuario54321]

What was it like before then?

[@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK]

@@QuarioQuario54321 Blue

[@ligerzero9840]

@shehannanayakkara4162 it was 1980 when red was associated with the Republican Party for Reagan just to show a clean map, but it stuck from there on out. But yes, fairly recent has the color red meant the Republican Party.

[@jasonkoch3182]

@@QuarioQuario54321a mix. Some places used blue for republicans, some used red. There wasn’t a standardized color used for either party until the 2000 election.

[@jasonkoch3182]

@@ligerzero9840incorrect. The colors weren’t standardized until 2000. Prior to that, some networks used red for democrats and blue for republicans. Go look up NBC’s coverage prior to 2000, including the Reagan years, and you’ll see their maps are blue.

[@garyv2498]

This was great. Your explanation of the chart really helped me understand how the parties used to be. Before I just had these vague ideas without much understanding. And I'm sure there's more detail, but this was a good solid foundation in my opinion.

[@armastat]

it in the removing of or in consolidating of the details, that allow u to make illustrations like this.

[@brainmuffins6052]

Ah yes, the pedigree of snek. From wiggler to slithering.

[@dannyarcher6370]

Don't tred on me.

[@danielzhang1916]

missed chance to say Slytherin haha

[@molliebowling7029]

Whiggler to Slytherin

[@ArkadiBolschek]

I'm more of a Ravenclaw guy myself

[@cdsnider9496]

I've been having this chart behind my desk for a few years. I love it.

[@smallstudiodesign]

The best chart I’ve ever seen which displays the political timeline of the United States of America 🇺🇸

[@davidcashin1894]

Love these old time lines. Not only do they capture a lot of history and attitudes we no longer hear about, but it is a fascinating attempt at quantifying and graphically representing non-numerical data. Napoleon's march on Russia is a great one and I found a fascinating poster that is like 5ft by 8ft showing the history of the Italian City states, Duchies merging into the Republic.

[@armastat]

its Analog ( almost a lost art, most people would give you a blank look when u use the word, means nothing to them)

[@Fredreegz]

As a European, it's always really weird seeing 'left wing' as blue and 'right wing' as red. Over here, red = socialism, blue = conservatism.

[@justforplaylists]

Here, they're both taken from the American flag. Like how red represents England and blue Scotland, but England isn't more left-wing than Scotland IIUC. I think the news used to switch between red and blue for the parties every election, but they got cemented in people's minds in the 2000 election which dragged on a lot, and in that one red happened to be Republican. All that's from memory though so I might be wrong.

[@RESIST_DIGITAL_ID_UK]

@@justforplaylists Scotland and Scottish party’s like the SNP are represented by Yellow.

[@Anastas1786]

@@justforplaylists In the early color TV era, the map makers just used whatever colors they pleased, but eventually the general but not universal custom developed into red and blue, with the incumbents (whoever they were) being blue and the challengers (whoever they were) being red, probably owing via analogy to the "red = revolutionary" connection. In the 2000 elections, not only did coverage last so long and take up so much airtime, but it was also the first time that _pretty much every news outlet_ happened to use the exact same color scheme, and blue Democrats and red Republicans kind of got stuck in our heads. Officially though, the Democratic Party only formally adopted an all-blue logo in 2010, and the California branch of the Republican Party insists on blue and green as its official colors.

[@classicalteacher]

The Democrats are changing their blue color to the rainbow flag.

[@NikorouKitsunerou]

It is said that US TV networks in the 80s used red for Republican states to push the association with the red Communists. Also by implication, that was around the time when US media and liberal arts in general started becoming very "liberal". I wouldn't know how true it might be now since I rarely ever turn on the TV.

[@calmkat9032]

I have an idea: a timeline of the various Eschatologies of different religions. Basically, an outline of the beginning of time through the various stages of tribulation, or the parts of the cycle that the cosmology goes through.

[@armastat]

check google - been done already

[@Hurlebatte]

If one goes back further they'll find the Whigs coming from the Parliamentarians. The Leveller faction of the Parliamentarians espoused things very similar to Paine, Jefferson, and Franklin.

[@luxborealis]

And if you go back farther than you’ll get the split between merchant petty nobility versus landowner and high nobility factions in Parliament. The English nobility created the Magna Carta largely to protect their interests against the King, but with how quickly it became key to the finances of the realm, the merchant-dominated burgher representatives gained ever increasing influence (especially after the Black Death) until finally they morphed into the Parliamentarian movement, dominated by the southeastern urban centers.

[@armastat]

Yes. politics actually was not a thing historically it was powerful people getting and keeping power and learning how to work with or survive meeting Other powerful people. A Political system was only developed when it became mandatory that the powerful would need the support of many other less powerful people in order not only to survive against other powerful people, but in order to gain more power. It has only been recently that the support base of a politics became so large that its a power itself and then the powerful had to develop a structure to keep that under their control. 'Bread and Circus' usually works.

[@Hurlebatte]

@@armastat Politicians needed votes in ancient Rome, and the phrase "bread and circuses" is from ancient Rome.

[@armastat]

@@Hurlebatte yes it is. the history i speak of tho - predates even Rome by a good many centuries a time when politics was not even refereed to as politics. even before politicians being a thing. when the first two cavemen clashed and could not defeat each other? politics was born. but even then it wasn't a system until more than 3 hordes clashed over territory and could not defeat one another, that is until 2 of them decided how to split up the thirds territory, banded together and killed the 3rd. Before doing so however that had to hammer out concrete assurances with each other that once they conquered the 3rd they would not go after each other in turn. unknown tho was that all three were talking in pairs to go after the other, it is just that 2 of them liked the terms each other gave as compared to the other guy. the guy who offered the lessor deal lost, in true political fashion... see? not much has changed.

[@rockingthemike]

i (among many others) suggested and have been waiting for something like this!

[@KevinVerberk]

😂 The gunshot sound at 4:33 🤌 chefs kiss 💀

[@Spearca]

And Hamilton disappears...

[@kate_cooper]

I’m going to assume he was assassinated.

[@Spearca]

@@kate_cooper No, killed by Aaron Burr in a duel.

[@Skotbot]

Exceptional video. Thank you!

[@deltasquared7777]

I would really like to see a timeline of the development of the scientific evolution of physics from Archimedes through Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Einstein, Dirac, Schrodinger, Bohr, Von Neumann, Hawking, Penfield, and onward; covering Ancient, Newtonian, Relativistic, Quantum, String theory, etc.

[@RubelliteFae]

Interesting. You only mentioned Westerners. I don't point this out because it's uncommon, but because it's too common.

[@tomblade]

​@@RubelliteFaewhich groundbreaking physicists are you referring to?

[@michaelmartin9022]

​@@RubelliteFaeThanks for reminding me to like his post

[@michaelmartin9022]

You might like the old TV show "Connections", there were four series, the first from circa 1978, the fourth from, er, 2022 (it's a British TV thing). The first series is best, though unfortunately pretty incomplete online. It starts off in ancient times where some chance discovery leads into many more chance discoveries / people trying to get rich quick, and winds up in modern times (for the show). When series 1 was made, computers were just starting to become commonplace in big business... series 4 was streamed online!

[@kingsleylaurent562]

6:03 this was such a beautiful tie in. Masterclass

[@tigerboy1966]

Thanks for this. I'm a Brit and US history between the Revolution and the Civil War is a bit of a blur for me.

[@johnweber4577]

It is so for far too many Americans as well unfortunately.

[@danielzhang1916]

the main thing to remember is just the parties changing names and positions over time

[@danielzhang1916]

@@johnweber4577 I think the problem is that it was never explained like this, just the different presidents

[@michaelmartin9022]

Loads of coffee drinking and spelling words with too few letters ensued.

[@armastat]

Not surprising when u have 1/2 of the political system actively trying to either hide their own history or rewrite it to suit themselves.

[@gabdraws7003]

Thank you for this vid, incredibly cool stuff 🤓

[@gabdraws7003]

HARD subscribed ❤

[@edwardcitrinitas]

Amazing video. You should do an episode on the Bayeux Tapestry

[@JorgeTorresH]

What a great video!! I never thought it would be so easy to understand the history of political parties in the US, this chart and your explainer definitely made it a piece of 🍰

[@DougGrinbergs]

Omigosh, this is crazy cool history stuff. Thanks!👍

[@deltasquared7777]

Very informative video, and really looking forward to your own new charting this subject !!

[@-landon931]

5:43 i realized the ground ad really fast. I'm frankly impressed

[@trevorcook3876]

My university has one of these in the reading room i do homework in and seeing this breakdown made me appreciate it a lot more.

[@ben-99-]

Hey Useful Charts - can you please go over the family tree of Christopher Reeves (from the Superman movies). He has a lot of famous family members and politicians throughout his family.

[@hamnchee]

I recently learned that medieval "Shire Reeves" is where the word "sheriff" comes from.

[@IIzTrollin]

love to see a chart like this through this election

[@PaulsensGarage]

12:48 Ahchoo : Hey Blinkin. Blinkin : Did you say 'Abe Lincoln'? Ahchoo : No, I didn't say 'Abe Lincoln', I said 'Hey Blinkin.' Hold the reins, man.

[@seesaw41]

4:34 I like that little reference to A. Ham's death when you were around the time of it happening on the chart.

[@hamnchee]

A mafia families chart would be kewl.

[@armastat]

that would just get you whacked,

[@doctordeej]

Fascinating, thank you. As a British chap, who has worked in and with the USA over the years, I learned so much.

[@doctordeej]

@ Apart from citing the original book and the source of the second chart you mean.

[@IanZainea1990]

i too have a deep appreciation for pre-computer design. Something as simple as the parallel lines on this chart took some amount of effort that simply isn't required on a computer. Heck, on illustrator you can draw two lines and then using the "blend" feature have it draw evenly spaced lines across the whole page... these guys had to actually think about that: How many lines? How far apart? Ensure that are at right angles and parallel to other lines, etc. I'm not saying that the tools we have now don't make it easier to do many things, like evenly spacing lines and ensuring they are parallel or perpendicular, things that are tedious and don't require much in the way of artistic skill, but the other things? Like the flowing lines on this chart... I think are easier by hand.

[@armastat]

its Art vs boilerplate its also analog and not digital.

[@montanaperkins9418]

I love your videos. Very informative and calming. Very nice so close to the US election.

[@ayyocool]

So dope. Loved the video.

[@TakenTook]

Thank you so much for making this video. Very necessary at a time like this.

[@TheRestedOne]

Such a shame that the Sparks format wasn't continued. That's got to be the most comprehensive summary of US politics I've seen.

[@neighborhoodmusicsnob5517]

I mean given how volatile even defining US politics is for a lot of people it might be for the best. Though many would argue they've gradually triangulated around the center and there's been few meaningful offshoot tendencies since the 1980s.

[@RubelliteFae]

​@@neighborhoodmusicsnob5517The center moves over time. So, I'm not sure how useful the idea that the rest triangulate on it is.

[@neighborhoodmusicsnob5517]

@@RubelliteFae is the rightist ratchet theory more appropriate?

[@RubelliteFae]

@@neighborhoodmusicsnob5517 I'm not sure about appropriateness, just commenting on utility. But yes, it seems useful to recognize the Ratchet Effect.

[@TheRestedOne]

@@neighborhoodmusicsnob5517 I don't think US politics has gotten more volatile since the Civil War. Rather, we've seen a long growth of Federalist enablement as a result of Lincoln, Grant, the Roosevelts, and Wilson. If anything, the 'few meaningful offshoots' have only served to embolden the Federalist legacy. The very least I'd like to see is the development of internal caucuses within the parties.

[@Daniel-rm5hz]

New to your channel. You're kickass! This is incredible for all the visual learners like myself! Keep up the great work!

[@JasonTaylor-po5xc]

Evidence for a 7th system is compelling. Both parties are so different than when first started voting that it must be a new system. Crazy times.

[@wittolwanderer6358]

Wow! Thank you for doing this! Sharing to grand-kids! Simple and visual.. just the way I like it. :)

[@zakuraiyadesu]

Incredible video!!!

[@rdh11201]

Great. Thanks Matt. I would wager you could produce an amazing update to these. Look forward to your revised US History. And please do a family tree for the Adamses. Thanks!

[@ClifffSVK]

"To prevent confusion with the modern parties, we call it the Democratic-Republican party"

[@vladthecon]

Would be so much easier to call them the old Republican Party

[@johnweber4577]

Historians also often refer to them as the Jeffersonian Republicans by historians which I tend to stick with. Especially given the fact that Democratic-Republican was used for other things including many of the radical political societies inspired by the Jacobin Club in France, some of which helped galvanize the Whiskey Rebellion, and the faction of the party that supported Andrew Jackson as opposed to either the National Republicans or Old Republicans represented by the likes of Henry Clay and John Randolph of Roanoke respectively.

[@anonyme7024]

Pretty cool how detailed this old timeline is! Would love a newer edition in that same style! (I don't hate Kathleen Kowal's, but having only two colors seems very reductive)

[@krysti2]

I love your beautiful charts!!*🎉

[@darnchacha1632]

That is a very interesting chart, I appreciate how atypical it is compared to the standardized and somewhat boring charts you typically get, Maybe it's not the most efficient but I appreciate that it's interesting to look at.

[@ages6592]

We have a situation of funny semantics in Sweden. There are many parties here but the Social Democrats ruled the country from 1936 to 1976 and even after that it ruled for large periods of time. This means that “the Conservatives” is now called “the Moderates” and they can’t really say that their policy is that they want to “conserve” the society because that would mean preserving a fundamentally social democratic society 😅

[@danielzhang1916]

it's funny that in Europe, conservatives might be Liberals, and vice versa, which makes it even more confusing, and now they're called Moderates too

[@nuclearsynapse5319]

That tracks, even in America the conservatives have historically just been their opposition going the speed limit. It's a very Whig history way of looking at things, but America is a young country, and its people do not have a long memory.

[@saberswordsmen1]

Arguably true of US conservatives as well, depending on the issue. Abortion had been a right federally in America for 5 decades... I'm not sure you can call the elimination of that a "conserve"ative position anymore. Some are even talking about removal of no fault divorce, another decades old institution. It's almost definitionally radical, not conservative in the strict sense.

[@MichieHoward]

The vintage and antique charts are pieces of art. They are made by artists and craftspeople as will the the authors/researchers of the charts.

[@thomasesau2376]

Before the Whigs and Tories there were the Guelphs and the Ghiblellines. In Rome were the Blues and Greens. So each cosmopolitans have conservatives versus liberals. Or "We can't" versus "We don't wanna."

[@stevemcalphabet2282]

Fascinating! Thank you so much!

[@TheStobb50]

Where it gets confusing to European we have the colours the opposite way Red means left wing, and blue means right wing

[@danielzhang1916]

we never had the red/left association over here, it never caught on like that

[@johndavis5835]

Thanks, this is a clear way to demonstrate facts on a time line.

[@dominicperez3777]

That's one hell of a chart!

[@MrAwesomeSaucem]

Loving this series, please don't stop making these!

[@justforplaylists]

Some people are saying they think a third party will form soon. I think under the current system, what would be a third party will form under one of the two big-tent parties since they can't win on their own. The Dems will essentially have left, centrist, and moderate conservative wings, with some independents like Sanders and Manchin caucusing with them. The Reps will have libertarian and authoritarian wings.

[@DustinManke]

Much appreciation for keeping a video with this subject matter unbiased. The nation needs more unity

[@ricinro]

The US is currently very unified. Go to work, go anywhere and 99.99 of the time you will see all Americans working together; gettin r done. When I was not retired a few years ago we decided as a group to limit politics in the workplace because it was a distraction and disruptive. However, it is also business to have news media and social media compete for eyes and emotional engagement as they sell ads. When you put the political noise in proportion it matters little compared to the realities of our families, work, health and neighbors.

[@DustinManke]

@@ricinro what I meant is when it comes to content that is political in nature or political adjacent, there is usually a clear bias, and I was commending him on his neutrality.

[@adennjusik5455]

@@DustinManke Their is bias here as well. I already commented on it. At 4:29 he says "the Electorate of the time is ONLY White Males." That is Objectively False. At that time Voting rights were decided by property ownership. A number of Free Black Men met this threshold of property and did in Fact vote. I think it also has to do with him stopping the timeline at 1930. Because as you get into the 1960s things become VERY divisive and contentious for both Parties.

[@thetorchyblameseries8100]

You are a genius. I spent hours trying to piece this very information together. You did it in an entertaining, educational and traditional American way. Thank you for y our wonderful channel. I am a proud subscriber.

[@danielzhang1916]

that's the problem, they don't teach it like this in school, so people don't even know about it

[@Daniel-pm7pr]

Love it, would be great to have the update to the original chart, it was very informative

[@Vampirecronicler]

Id love to buy these charts

[@alesh2275]

Made me wonder who owns the IP for the original chart? I’d sure like the channel to be able to update the original but in the original wavy style!

[@solarwalker1044]

Too funny, I literally just saw this chart at the James A Garfield presidential site last week! I thought to myself wow I’d love if Useful Charts did this

[@sebastianlucas7449]

Such an interesting and eye-opening look back on history. Crazy how the parties may be the 'same' by name, but they stand for completely different values now than they used too

[@markislivingdeliberately]

That’s a lie the slave loving democrats have told 😂

[@evertvandenberghe]

What a great chart! And what a useful video! I wished I had this chart while listening to the American Presidents Total Rankium podcast :)

[@sharonvik7643]

Thank you for this!! I cast my (early) vote yesterday. 🙂

[@classicalteacher]

Vote early, vote often. It's the Democrat way. Amazing to see the Democrats have always been racist.

[@MartNM]

​@@classicalteachercould you elaborate on this or should i bring up the party switch?

[@JM-xu3cr]

​@@MartNM There you are. I knew someone would bring up the mythical "party switch."

[@darkdragon5520]

@@JM-xu3crMy dude, the party switched happened. Or are you trying to tell me the democrats are the rural religious conservatives?

[@globalwarrior16]

This video is amazing, a non-biased view of political history is kinda what i needed rn

[@jawsua32]

The American/Know-Nothing party was also extremely anti-Catholic

[@green_2159]

This is awesome. This is a crazy good US history summary.

[@frosty848]

Update: seems there is a 7th system lol

[@leeboyen]

very informative, thank you !

[@bean420man]

Does anyone make reproductions of this chart or the one that goes up to 1890?

[@samuelwinburn210]

I LOVE THIS CHART!!! I’m going to show this to the professor who showed this chart to me

[@Paul73849]

Hi, can you please make a video on how to become the president?

[@unrealuknow864]

Get some billionaires to fund you. That's the only way. It's all corruption now.

[@volodyadykun6490]

Step 1. Wait to become old

[@ms.donaldson2533]

Be born into the Society and indebt your soul to The Order

[@lucasdolding6924]

Be over 35 and have lots of money

[@unrealuknow864]

@@Paul73849 have Billionaire friends to fund you and not a shred of moral character

[@IanZainea1990]

I would love to see this go to FDR in this style. After that probably a little less interesting, but would be cool

[@justforplaylists]

I wonder if there's some 90-year-old who's like "I vote R because I like Eisenhower" or something 120-year-old who's like "I vote R because I like Hoover."

[@DaveSmith-pm2yq]

Ironically, Trumps foreign policy has some similarities with Eisenhower's.

[@Ficalos]

Every now and again you'll hear modern Republicans unironically refer to themselves as the "party of Lincoln"

[@justforplaylists]

​@@Ficalos Including throughout this very comment section.

[@justforplaylists]

​@@DaveSmith-pm2yq How so? I don't know much about Eisenhower, but I get the impression Trump is basically isolationist, was Eisenhower?

[@Spearca]

​@@justforplaylists No. Eisenhower represented the activist, internationalist wing of Republicans at the time, in contrast to the Robert Taft isolationist wing.

[@dawerperezcanete1230]

Amazing explanation thank you so much very clarifying!! Although I had to say that the last part of the foundation after switching into the updated, I felt needing more details From you’re amazing explanation. There are some lines in the second part that I cannot understand by myself compare with I feel that I understand all the lines on the first map and the reason for me at least is that you really have a great amazing way to explain things.!! 🙏🕺🙏👏👏👏👊

[@GrimrDirge]

Murray Rothbard's paper "Transformation of the American Party System" is a very short and kinda mind-blowing exploration of this very subject.

[@gustavofender1]

Can't wait for your new chart!

[@EuphoricPentagram]

I pose calling the 2nd system the “party party” since there were so many party’s that it was like a party of party’s

[@TheHylianBatman]

I love this chart! If I may offer a suggestion, I'd love a video looking at British political history, especially the really old stuff!

[@crazyfroster9489]

Not the random unprecedentedly loud gunshot SFX at 4:32 making me take my headphones off and check no one in my house accidentally set something off

[@brianplank5905]

It wasn't random, it was marking the only good thing Aaron Burr ever did.

[@ingunowner7088]

Fantastic episode,. Subscribed.

[@ChartTracks]

Could you do a chart on the Native Americans... specially the Anasazi, and their relationship to the Hopi, Navajo and others that migrated in to their territories. This is also a great video... I am sharing with my friends.

[@viktorka1485]

Such a beautiful and concise chart! A work of art! Pity its not too this day.

[@rgmontoya3398]

This will hurt some peoples brains as they are in disbelief of some of this

[@W1LLi4m_]

Exactly. The democratic party has always been the racist party, obviously even to this day.

[@crazysarge9765]

what?

[@jspihlman]

​@@crazysarge9765There are people who don't believe the great switch where Republicans and Democrats became what they are today but were essentially the opposite from their founding.

[@JuceiYoutube]

​@@jspihlmanreally? I thought it was common knowledge

[@classicalteacher]

Amazing. Democrats have always been the party of racism. They haven't changed.