Would the first minority President most likely be a Democrat or Republican?
927022
Republican, the democrats have a tendency of placing polarizing figures up for the position.  If you run a poll on Powell, Rice, Gonzales vrs say Sharpton, Jackson, Obama I would say the republican side would win.  I could be wrong on Obama though, don't really know much on him.  But overall, the minorities that the reps put out on a whole have more cross over appeal than what the dems have.
1138723
Abraham Lincoln was the first "Republican" President, elected in 1860.  It is simplistic to think that one side was Democrat and the other was Republican.  Just like today, there are Democrats and Republicans in all States.  The correct way to look at this would be in terms of political ideology rather than parties.  That is "Federalists"; those that believed in a strong national government and "Anti-federalists"; those that believed in strong states rights and a weak national government.  The "North" was "Federalist" and the "South" was "Anti-federalist"\n** Note:Prior to the 1860 election, the two major parties were the Whigs and the Democrart-Rebublicans (Democrats for short) originally founded by Thomas Jefferson.
67746
JFK was the youngest elected president.\nTeddy Roosevelt was the youngest in office.
109276
I think it would probably be First Gentleman, specifically the first First Gentleman.
429319
Blacks are not part of the democratic party any more than whites are part of the republican party. People tend to lean towards the party the more closely matches their views.\nDemocrats tend to give more attention to minority issues than republicans.
52320
Please cite your sources for an accusation of racism in the GOP.  (Just for the record, I am NOT, and have never been, a Republican.)\nIf the GOP is racist, why did its first president - Abraham Lincoln - actively work to denounce and end slavery?  Why did a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote FOR the Civil Rights Act of 1964?  Why, during the current administration, did they appoint Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice to positions of power?  Why do plenty of Republicans support Ms. Rice as a candidate for President in 2008?\nPlease, even if you are, like me, not a GOP kind of person, at least give credit where credit is due.
454545
Until the current administration I would have said Democrats... But the Republicans have proven they also are far too expansive for my taste.\n\nThere are a couple reasons though. \n\n1. Socialistic causes for the general population.\n2. Jobs (mostly appointed) for the buddies of the politicians.  If you want a good job thats secure in this country best be good friends with a political office holder.
962630
probably John McCain and Hilary/obama/Kerry
4881
I assume you are asking if he was the first President of the United States. This is a common misconception. He was the President of the United States in Congress, a title given to the head of the legislature under the Articles of Confederation, a brief experiment between the Revolution and the Constitution, which had no executive branch, and thus no president, at least as we conceive him. He was instead something like a prime minister, though even that is a stretch. He had very little real power in his position. Besides, if you're really going to say that his position is equivalent, then the first president would have to be Peyton Randolph, who served as the President of the First Continental Congress.
974196
I'd probably say white female president.  If you look in history white women got more rights before blacks did.
691489
Hard to say. Senator, Congress-person; sure. But cabinet members, and joint chiefs don't have to be natives. The Speakers and majority/minority leaders are in the succession, but cannot become President if they aren't natives. I geuss it would be Vice-President, but that person could not ascend to the Presidency unless he or she was a native; so it would go to the Speaker of the House. And what if he or she is not a native? Good question.
861246
Yes it is possible. If no one gets the required electorial votes to win president but does have "the most" they could still lose the election once it enters the House of Representatives. This is very unlikely in our two party system but if we had a strong third party it is very possible.
554565
That's a hard one. But I honestly think he would be a democrat due to his constant supporting of woman's rights and his progressive thoughts.
666666
Well, that would depend on what you mean by democrat.  If you are talking about the new democrats, otherwise known as socialist, Bush is most certainly a Republican.  If you are talking about where he stands on issues, and use the old democratic party (before they were lying evil sack of crap, only care about election, socialist democrats)as a guide, I would say Bush is right on the border of republican and democrat.  \n\nHowever on paper he is a Republican
973012
Yes\n\nLiberals represent a 1.4% minority according tho the Census bureau\n\nRecent polls show a majority of Americans want some change to the Stay the Path model that we have been living with.\n\nGo big Red Go
763575
He'll still be a member of congress.  Maybe he saw the minority leader as being demotion.
260590
Teddy Roosevelt.\nJFK was the youngest President to ever be elected.  But Teddy Roosevelt was 6 months younger when he took office due to the President's assassination.