so the whigs end up losing badly, predictably in 1852 to franklin pearce and the democratic party. most significant, however, was that the two major parties were almost completely silent on the political issues that most interested americans during the middle 1850s. two of them we've already talked about a fair bit, right? talked about the slavery expansion, slavery extension issue, number one, and number two we talked a little about immigration. on both those question, the parties are virtually silent in 1852. that alienates a lot of voters, oh, a third issue which often doesn't get much attention was probably more important on the state level but still was an issue is the question of temperance. temperance laws are what was sometimes called the main law which was a prohibition law first passed in maine back in the 1840s, that also was an issue, of course, it was an issue again that traditionally the whigs had championed especially in the north. but all of those issues were not mentioned, were hardly mentioned at all during the 1852 campaign. okay, i want to go back to the question

1850s we notice realignment, the democratic party is changing. doesn't survive unchanged. age new parties vie for the support of people disenchanted with the present political situation. for many americans something had gone wrong. the minor party that's merge in the 1850s are addressing the question what's gone wrong. what is the most serious threat to the republic and to self-government? what's the most serious threat? is it slavery's expansion? is that it? a lot of northerners would have said yes. some southerners would have said yes defending their right to expand and take their personal property anywhere. some would say immigration. i want to turn and look at that group of the question of the -- for voters, the people who are most concerned about immigration as the primary issue. as we said the influx of roman catholics had spawned anti-catholic nativists, so-called no-nothing lodges, how they're given that name, right. their secret. so when you're asked to talk about this group you belong to you're supposed to say i know nothing, right? so the name sort of stuck. nati

the democratic party is changing. it survives but it doesn't survive unchange. new minor parties vie for the support of americans who are disenchanted with the present political situation. for many americans something had gone terribly wrong so the minor parties that emerge in the 1850s are addressing the question, you know, what's gone wrong. what's the most serious threat to the republic and to self-government? what's the most serious threat? what is it? is it slavery's expansion? is that it? a lot of northerners would have said, yes. some southerners would have said yes in terms of defending their right to expand and take their personal property anywhere. some would say immigration. i want to turn, as i said, and look at that group of the question -- of the -- for voters, the people who are most concerned about immigration as the primary issue. all right. well, as we said, the influx of roman catholic immigrants had helped spawn groups of anti-catholic natives. they were organized first into secret fraternal organizations, so-called no nothing lodges. they're

in the democratic party when some of the others wanted to leave at times. >> what party was strom thurman in that debate and who saw the debate in those days? >> he was a democratic senator at that point, i believe. and he was -- it was seen on -- i believe it was cbs. i think eric severeid was on cbs, he was the narrater, eric severeid, of that debate. this is the problem i have of all this whole thing i was trying to do a 15-minute segment on how the civil rights law was passed and there were no cameras, and i had to do the whole thing without ever being in the room and the whole thing took place in the room. and one of the finds was the debate. people couldn't see what was going on, there was a clock on tv showing how long the filibuster was going on. it really had public attention. and this debate was a way to bring the whole thing to the people on tv, so it was on national tv. >> i went in and looked at the vote totals and i think people might be surprised how it came out. in the house the democratic party voted 61% for it and 39% against it. the republican party voted 80% for it and

you're getting kind of a northern wing and southern wing the democratic party. and what those two groups are going to have to do is come together and find out who they want the presidential candidate to be. now, the democrats decide to meet for no apparent reason, certainly not a smart one, in south carolina. the hot bed of the success movement. that's where they go to try to talk about some sort of solution to a crisis. again, not smart. they go down to charleston. all right. southern democrats, okay, the southern wing of the party, very much wants protections about the idea that slavery is going to be able to continue to expand into the territories. okay. they want that option. that, you know, we don't want to put it up to a slovote. we want some sort of protections that slavery is going to be able to continue to expand into the territories. the northern wing of the democratic party is saying we're going to have to come up with some sort of compromise. we're not going to be able to hold a hard line on this issue anymore. the northern wing of the democratic part

you're getting kind of a northern wing and a southern wing of the democratic party. what those two groups are going to have to do is come together and find out who they want the presidential candidate to be. now, the democrats decide to meet for no apparent reason, certainly not a smart one, in south carolina, the hot bed of the secession movement. that's where they go to talk about some sort of solution to the crisis. again, not smart. they go down to charleston, all right, southern democrats, okay, the southern wing of the party very much wants protections about the idea that slavery is going to be able to continue to expand into the territories, okay? they want that option that we don't want to put it up to a vote, we don't want to make a popular sovereignty, we want some protection that slavery can continue to expand into the territories. the northern wing of the democratic party is saying we have to come up with a compromise. we can't hold a hard line on this issue anymore. the northern wing of the democratic party wants steven douglas to be their candidate, okay

you're getting a northern wing and a southern wing of the democratic party. and what those two groups are going to have to do is come together and figure out who they want the presidential candidate to be. now, the democrats decide to meet for no apparent reason, certainly not a smart one, not since south carolina. again, not smart. the idea that slavery is going to continue to expand into the territories, okay. they want that option, that, you know, that we don't want to put it up to a vote. we don't want to make a popular sovereignty. we want some sort of protection that slavery is going to be able to continue to expand into the territories. the northern wing of the democratic party is saying we're going to have to come up with some sort of compromise. we're not going to be able to hold a hard line on this issue, anymore. the northern wing wants steven douglas to be their candidate. so what's going to happen is the southern wing of the democratic party is going to storm out of that convention. the democrats are going to have to reconvene later. in the end, w

that is the democratic party in texas is the multiracial, multiethnic party. the republicans in part because they guessed so badly at the prop 180 phase remains an overwhelmingly white political of redistricting one of the members of the legislation said they were hoping to create a system in which white people looked at the political system and thought there's a party for white people and there's a party that's not for white people. so those two dynamics are very important in the two states. in terms of partisan realignment and that probably has it own set of effects. >> that's sort of what you're saying. >> yeah. i mean, i think whether or not there's political diversity in texas is largely up to the republican party right now. i think if the republican party gets it act together and starts rehi growi growing demographic of their state, which many republicans believe there are a lot of latinos who can vote republican because they see an alignment with certain positions of the republican party. i think that texas is at a tipping point in terms of what politic

i mean, my pet theory -- [laughter] we'll hear the data, but my pet theory is that the democratic party have sort of made it very hard to identify with because precisely the direction the party has taken ever since jimmy carter is not to plant a strong flag and to meet the republicans halfway. >> chris, you have some data on this? >> sure. [laughter] well, you know, one of the traits, psychological traits of liberals is being open to experience. open to new be experience. that both predicts liberalism, and it predicts being an independent, right? predicts nonaffiliation because you want to be different. you want to be i'm not one of those, i'm me. i'm this delicate flower. >> democrat's someone who can't take their own side in an argument. >> exactly. it's the whole herding cats thing. i don't know, i think it's kind of going to all exist. >> yeah. i don't belong to an organized political party, i'm a democrat. [laughter] >> it seems to me that's part of what we're seeing in terms of the gridlock in washington because you have republicans who recognize that it's not helpful to their pol

party. to use it as a kind of litmus test. just as northern democrats wanted support for the compromise also to be a test of party loyalty. but, but this had all sorts of bad consequences. if this agreement was enforced so let's say let's enforce the support for the compromise of 1850 as a kind of sign of party loyalty, if that happened, the two major parties then would not disagree on this issue. remember we said that one of the key features of a vital and vibrant two-party system is to really have different positions, distinctive positions on issues. especially issues that americans that most americans cared a lot about. well, if the agreement was enforced in this way the two major party was have consensus over this issue. some politicians thought that was okay. they viewed the slavery extension issue or the slavery question in general as too difficult, as too controversial, you know, as a political hot potato that they simply couldn't handle and they thought that new issues, perhaps maybe even new parties would emerge once the compromise had been uni

and not everyone in his ruling democratic party supports it. and the leader of the dpj's junior coalition partner, the people's new party, says he's leaving the coalition. >>> nhk world's senior commentator joins us now to give his perspective on this story. how necessary is this extra tax revenue? >> well, prime minister noda says that he needs to reduce the government spending deficit. but the extra tax still won't be enough to balance the budget. japan's fiscal standing is the worst among industrialized or developed nations. its debt is twice its gross domestic product. and it's facing rising social security costs, too. some economists are concerned that japan may face same fate as gra greece and italy. but they're facing criticism from opposition parties and even among members of his own democratic party. they insist that the prime minister noda has not done his homework yet. he promised to maintain fiscal discipline and to make social security more sustainable. and japanese voters also critical. they want noda to cut more wasteful governme

a moment ago we're talking about the republican party to what extent is it also part of the democratic party and perhaps even some of the groups that are nonpartizan right well this isn't just about the republican party the democratic party has being complicit in the sexual counterrevolution as well and it goes back to the seventy's for war and the democrats also when there was a reaction within the democratic party among older actually very liberal man against the rising forces. of the young of college students of multiculturalists in the party. and what happened it's a complicated story that i tell the book but they opposed the new social issues being brought up that when we govern lost the one nine hundred seventy two election by a landslide they decided it was the fault of the base they blame progressive they blame women basically they blame feminists and it wasn't actually true if you look at what happened in that election but it became a narrative that has stuck with the democrats since that time and whenever democrats really face to feed they kind of. go back to this idea that they lo

serious internal divisions within the democratic party in new york. i think i may have talked about this before. a lot of faction al i mean among the democrats in new york. factionalism. hunker group and the barn burner group. we won't get into that, but suffice to say the wigs again end up with a successful candidate with electing the president in the form of zachary taylor, but ironically again, someone who's not really a committed wig. someone who is less than a die hard wig, you know, in the clay or webster mold. taylor had often portrayed himself not as a wig candidate but as a no party candidate, as someone who's kind of above party, and he incorrectly assumed that a broad coalition had made him president and that he owed little to the wigs per se. political historians know that's nonsense, that in fact it was the wig party machine that got him elected, but that was his perception. and the way that zachary tailor would attempt to deal with the mexican session, remember the mexican session? that's that territory seeded by mexico to the united stat

confront the most powerful forces in american politics, with his own future and that of the democratic party hanging in the balance. as his moment finally arrived, the heat near the platform became unbearable. >> mr. chairman, fellow democrats, fellow americans, i realize that in speaking in behalf of the minority report on civil rights, that i'm dealing with a charged issue, with an issue which has been confused by emotionalism on all sides of the fence. i feel i must rise at this time to support the minority report, a report that spells out our democracy, a report that the people of this country can and will understand and a report that they will enthusiastically acclaim on the great issue of civil rights. to those who say that we are rushing this issue of civil rights, i say to them, we are 172 years late. >> humphrey drew a line in the sand and his words reverberated throughout the country as 60 million people listened at home and work. >> the time has arrived in america for the democratic party to get out of the shadows of states rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of

party associated with his name. i don't personally like him. i think he should of paid his child support. he is also a former democrat. now all in the tate party are not necessarily joe walsh. ea party are not necessarily joe walsh. >> are you saying all of the congressional races are set up. >> what i am saying is if you draw the map you draw the map so that to republicans are fighting a chopper. >> she is also very strong candidate.. >>joe walsh as for a whirlpool. is vulnerable. >> a political cartoonist joins us and the studio. >> if you go to chicago tribune.com this is santorum hanging off of romney. this is cartoon excellence. later tonight to have the state of illinois with a fabulous hair cut. the big winner tonight there is maddigan. >> his the roller. . >> only thing his missing-i would like to see the top law- enforcement officers and the state of illinois sitting in his lap. and if the governor. >> she does not prosecute corruption and. >> i have one last cartoon it's called the a team, and that got me thinking of my version of the a team. . >> [laughter]. >>i pity the fool. >> thank you scott i appreciate

i think that they are in charge the democrat party the republican party at least no conspiracy that they should run every aspect of all of our lives ok michael in new york if i go to you also believe that she won every aspect of the lives of the rest of the world ok michael if i go to you how is ron paul changing the political discourse in the united states how is he changing it when we talk about conservatism liberalism even libertarianism mean is this campaign a defining moment or a moment or a beginning of a defining moment in how americans talk about politics. i think it's the beginning of a defining moment i mean our political discourse is controlled by the media by large scale institutions think tanks and by direct mail groups operating in suburban virginia and ron paul for the first time is really building an infrastructure to disseminate his ideas in the long term and you know in this campaign he's going out there state to state finding out who are the people that are sympathetic to his ideas whether they were publicans whether they're independents whether they're libertarian par

i think there's some rising stars in the democratic party. i think hillary clinton as always would have made a great president and would always make great president in my view. >> if it's not secretary clinton, how do you think is the democratic nominee in 2016? >> i think andrew cuomo is a rising star. he's doing extremely well in new york state gathering the right kind of constituency that could win a democratic party and i think he's also looking to the general putting new york's fiscal house in order. >> what about on the republican side? >> i think if president obama wins 2012 it will be a cast of thousands. we have a wonderful bench of governors who have done very, very well. there are too many even to list here. you will have some very, very

democratic party the ones to confiscate the money that anybody earns beyond whatever the democrats think they should earn what ron paul signifies here is actually very much the tea party message in that the government has gone beyond that spawns we have oh a war going on in this country right now a civil war going on in this country between the people who should be running the government and the elites who think they're better than the rest of us and who are running the government they don't want to let go of it these old fossils these old dusty old white guys are going to sit there until they die or fossilize they have they. i think that they are in charge the democrat party tonight have a look at him at least no conspiracy that they should run every aspect of all of our lives ok michael in new york i go to you also believe that she won every aspect of the lives of the rest of the world ok michael if i go to you how is ron paul changing the political discourse in the united states how is he changing it when we talk about conservatism liberalism even libertarianism mean is this campaign

ron paul frankly belongs in the republican party nor the democratic party because when you hear him talk you'll find half the time republicans cheer half the time democrats cheer or maybe i should say a third a third because a third of the time people just scratch their heads and say what he brings up monetary policy no candidate ever brings a monetary policy he believes in the gold standard which is a throwback a hundred years ago neither party supports that so he has some ideas for one party some from the other and some that are frankly his own he does represent a third force in american politics i think the libertarian force will always be smaller than the republican or democratic force but i'm glad he's out there and i'll tell you one thing about ron paul the man has integrity he doesn't change his views to fit the wind or the way mitt romney might do this man believes what he says i think some of it is wildly off the wall but i give the guy credit for being consistent michael what do you think about that in third force we just heard from mark in washington is

following the reports in russia also of the flamboyant the eccentric leader of the liberal liberal democratic party he also a veteran of the complaints also running in every single presidential election ever since the collapse of the soviet union he's eccentric certainly and he certainly has some chance of making it into the second round runoff should it happen another candidate is the leader of the fair russia party something that all of also quite frequent he has been running in every single election but still he participated in the two thousand and four election as far as i can remember and he used to be head of the upper house of the russian parliament and also we have russian tycoon mikhail prokhorov somewhat of a dark horse in this particular presidential campaign he's a newcomer to politics and it's the first time he's running as president also seen by many experts says the most as one of the likely candidates to make it into the second round runoff should it happen in fact it's the main intrigue of this presidential race whether it would be able to garner more than fifty percent of the vote

>> well, my dad found it an independent democratic party in alabama at a time when the regular democratic party was dominated by george wallace and the dixiecrats. despite being a dentist and a two-time but the tory and his abdication of agitation, he poured hundreds of thousand dollars of his own money in the 60's, 60's and early 70's into this political party so that the albanians could vote for lyndon johnson rather than george wallace and that in the hundreds of thousands of newly registered black voters would have people to vote for. could not just vote, but also run for office. and so that was his life's work. he was very much committed to a recapturing the greatness of african americans in terms of political participation. very steep in the era of reconstruction because his grandfather had been a reconstruction legislator. he grew up hearing about his grandfather, gramm partial while he was coming of age and jim-crow. it radicalized and to be living under jim-crow in alabama well hearing about the fact that black people used to actually have political power and be in office, includ

the liberal democratic party is about was in office that you and i so we wanted to have the best part and then i think you thank you very much because then didn't just bear in mind that my guests on the show today was political analyst constantine seaman and that's it for now from all of the spotlight and we'll be back with more for us and comment on what's going on in from outside russia of course comments on the results of the presidential election in this country until then they are to continue. the the fight .

. >> the reason why i'm recalled is because the democrat party is trying to change of the composition of the legislature. >> it splits the senate down the middle between republicans and democrats and puts a temporary power share in place. they'll colead the chamber until the june 5th elections. a year ago the republicans had the majority and they put strict curbs of collective bargaining of public employees. galloway drafted a law that allowed gun owners to carry concealed weapons. the recall elections will go forward without galloway on their ballot including walker, and three other republican state senators including scott fitzgerald. joining me is communication of the democrat party of wisconsin. graham, good evening. >> good evening, keith. >> fitzgerald was quoted aas aing that the recall had no, sir to do with the decision of galloway to resign. was the timing extraordinarily awkward for them? >> you would have to ask senator galloway. our thoughts and prayers are with her, but she was going to lose her election. 29,000 people called for her recall. there was very little chance

. >> so, what's the difference between the democratic party today and the democratic party you're writing about? >> the democratic party of polk's day was much closer really to the republican party of today. i happen to believe that the 20th century president that was most like jackson was ronald reagan. and that the 20th president who was most like jackson's great rival henry clay, was franklin roosevelt. they were both great patriots, clay and jackson, they hated each other, but they loved america. they had nothing but the greatest designs for america's future. but clay believed in the concentration of power in washington on behalf of all those aims and goals. whereas jackson believed that power should be diffused and spread out among the people as much as possible. so in these days they would talk about strict construction. all the democrats in those days were in favor of strict constructions of the constitution. that's a republican phrase today. or small government. that's a republican phrase. >> so we really should throw out the labels and try to compare them. >> start over. what was

much for being here, aappreciate the chance to talk with you. >> thank you. >> democrats control the senate, so your party can pretty well control the agenda in the senate within reason. why did democrats put the republicans anti-contraception bill, this blunt amendment, up for debate? why put this out there? >> what is unfortunate this is an amendment being proposed to the highway bill, the transportation bill that has broad bipartisan support and the blunt amendment is very divisive amendment that the republicans want to get a vote on, and so we want to get moving to the highway bill that is going to put people back to work, that has bipartisan support so we said, you know, we'll vote on your amendment. it is a continuation attacks we have seen on women's health that began with the effort to defund planned parenthood and then stop supporting family planning services, title x now we're seeing an effort to prevent women's access to contraceptive care. >> is it your sense as this is going to be voted on as you and others have drawn attention to this to make sure everybody understands what is being voted on

parties think they have a winner here. rush limbaugh reframed the debate on democrat's terms.he republicans are trying to say at last how the health care plan intrudes on religious liberty. he said words anybody would find offensive. i think potentially, romney lost an opportunity to speak out forcefully against rush limbaugh. this was not a gray area. look no further than the fact that even rush limbaugh apologized for it. on the other hand, it would have shown political courage and backbone and i think that would help him with conservatives. >> it -- >> the big myth about rush limbaugh, he cannot deliver a pizza let alone a boat. a lot of noise. people cover him like he is 8 king of the republian party. that said, this was an opportunity for mitt to push back, and even santorum said it was absurd. and i think it was a lost opportunity for his campaign. they can do the 30 yards in the cloud of dust campaign to be the nomination. they have to watch the general election, too, or it will be a worthless nomination. >> and the president has overreached perhaps by calling the colle

it is getting less existent in the democratic party with the idea of a moderate democrat. the national journal and data analysis of the voting patterns. there is almost nobody in the middle. how do you make a deal if nobody is in the middle? i hope obama offers her a job and puts her in something because you are in charge of something important. -- i hope obama offers her a job and poster in charge of something important. >> it is sad for the person and the senate. she pinpoint the problem. the goal in congress is to block the other side. if you are a democrat, you vote against republican plans. if you are republican, you vote against democratic plans. gridlock has become your highest goal. you are not really there to pass anything or change anything anymore. you are just there to keep the other side -- >> i would put it differently. i do not think gridlock is the goal. both parties are excluding their own ends to the exclusion of everyone else. others want to try to reach some accommodation on policy issue. what is missing in the senate is the notion of respect for one an

democrats figured out finally that they could not be a national party without winning read state america. i do not think the republican party has figured that out yet. if we lose maine and some other states, i think a lot more republicans are going to start speaking out against the more extreme elements out there. if that takes place it is going to happen because conservatives tried to hang their hat on the social issues and that is where they lost it. you would agree or disagree? >> a month ago i would have disagreed. today i do agree 100%. this past month has been the worst month for the republican party since august of 1974 when richard nixon resigned, and i mean that you're a good -- i mean that. we have allowed us to be a party defined by contraceptives. we are debating survey that should have been close in 1965. you have saying contraception is bad and he is going to use his presidential platform to speak out against it. you have the front runner talking about how jfk made him want to throw up on his sweater vest because john kennedy was talking about separation of church and state

it is starting to happen in the democratic party. it exacerbates the party. the number of competitive districts is minuscule because they are drawn to be compact units, singularly democratic or republican districts. the fight is only which one gets elected in the primary. >> american military presence in the middle east. are we getting out or in more detail? >> in one of our longest wars, he wrote one of the most extraordinary chapters in american military history. now the iraqi people have a chance to forge their own destiny. everyone of you can take pride in knowing you gave the iraqis that opportunity. use succeeded in your mission. -- he is succeeded in your mission. >> it remains to be seen what the iraqis will do with that opportunity. we're still very much in afghanistan. the people our military have been training are now killing our troops. is it time to get out. >> there is already a plan to disengage. the question is whether we step up the timetable. there is the big question around afghanistan, the future of iraq, the middle east with syria, and the

craig, i mean is the democratic party fulloolfoolhardy to make a deal with these guys? >> yeah. r and cantor, the leaders of the party it's like trying to chase cats organizing their party. boehner, i have to sympathize. i don't know why he doesn't quit and join olympia snowe on the island of misfit toys. he has 100 or scores of republicans, tea party republicans who just want to pace paint faces and grab hatchets and chop down anything that says government. they don't want to governor. they don't want a companyuntry with a government that works he is trying to make these deals. he doesn't represent a party votes that he can hold together. it's like for democrats. it's like trying to make a contract with the januaritoitor of a company because nobody is running the place. >> carl real quick, does that mean a president that fights them is more likely to gets results as by the way he did on judicial nominations today when the republicans backed down than a president who tries to actually get to a reasonable compromise with guys who don't listen to it if they get the compromise? >> t

the democratic party must never be allowed to become a party of privilege for a man of modest means or no means at all cannot rise to a service in the nation. i'm speaking up at this time because i would hope that many of delegates that have been stampeded or pressured into preconvention commitments against their better judgment and i'll know first hand of such instances. i hope those dealt gates have a chance to exercise further judgment. there is yet time before the convention opening on july 11th for the delegates to reflect on their individual responsibilities to the party and to the nation. this is a time of great difficulty in the world. we cannot afford to be swayed by personal likes or dislikes. we must be careful not to permit ourselves to be moved by personal prejudices of religious b big gotary. the usefullessness of the party and the restoration of leadership to the nation are of such paramount importance that i'm compelled to disregard the meeting of friends to replain solid about the situation that developed. they've urged me not to do anything that upset or offend anyone