Theodore Roosevelt

Donald Trump One Of The Lowest Popular Vote Percentage Winners In American History, And NOT Due To Strong Third Party Performances!

Donald Trump’s percentage of the popular vote continues to decline, and now makes Trump one of the lowest popular vote percentage winners in American History, and NOT due to strong third party performances.

Right now, Trump has 46.28 percent of the vote and is 2.35 million popular votes behind Hillary Clinton, who has 48.2 percent of the vote.

The only 7 Presidents to have lower percentage are:

John Quincy Adams 1824—30.92

Abraham Lincoln–1860–39.65

Woodrow Wilson–1912–41.84

Bill Clinton–1992–43.01

Richard Nixon–1968–43.42

James Buchanan–1856–45.29

Grover Cleveland–1892–46.02

Before it is all over, Trump is likely to fall lower than Cleveland, and possibly Buchanan, in percentage of the popular vote, when all votes are accounted for.

In each of these seven cases, however, there were more than two strong Presidential candidates, and a third party and twice a fourth party gained electoral votes.

Adams had electoral vote competition from Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, and William Crawford in 1824.

Lincoln had electoral vote competition from John C. Breckinridge, John Bell, and Stephen Douglas in 1860

Wilson had electoral vote competition from Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft in 1912.

Clinton had electoral vote competition from George H. W. Bush and Ross Perot in 1992.

Nixon had electoral vote competition from Hubert Humphrey and George Wallace in 1968.

Buchanan had electoral vote competition from John C. Fremont and Millard Fillmore in 1856.

Cleveland had electoral vote competition from Benjamin Harrison and James Weaver in 1892.

However, Trump had no third party competitor who took electoral votes away from him or Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent.

And only Adams ended up second in popular votes with a percentage of the vote lower than Trump.

So Donald Trump cannot claim a popular mandate by any means.

The Destructive Nature Of Third Parties: Protest Vote But Leads Too Often To Less Preferable Nominee Winning White House

Third Parties are supposed to represent democracy in action, but we have now learned the hard way that it denies popular vote winners the Presidency!

It happened in 2000, when Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan took enough votes away to harm Al Gore, and elect George W. Bush.

And now it has happened again in 2016, with Gary Johnson and Jill Stein taking enough votes to harm Hillary Clinton and elect Donald Trump.

Bush did much harm in his Presidency, and realistically, Donald Trump can be seen as likely to do even greater damage.

Any one who voted third party in 2000 or 2016 should feel guilt, as it has led to the worse choice, and nothing was accomplished, except maybe to feel good that one protested.

There is no way to prevent third party movements, but it has NEVER had a positive effect, with maybe the exception of Theodore Roosevelt’s Progressive (Bull Moose) Party in 1912.

But in a democracy, nothing can be done to prevent this harmful action from taking place, so likely, we will lose the better Presidential nominee more times in the future!

The Moment Has Arrived: The Election Of The First Woman President Is Coming In 24 Hours!

The time has finally arrived!

One day from this writing, America will have its first woman President, way behind many other nations, including Great Britain, Germany, Israel, India, Pakistan, and others.

America will have broken the glass ceiling permanently!

America will have demonstrated that it is a true democracy, successively electing an African American President, and a woman President!

Hillary Clinton will be an outstanding President, who will further fulfill the progressive agenda of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama.

But also the progressive tradition of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt as well!

The greatness of America is evident, and it will continue to be the nation that the world admires and respects!

Grand Rapids: Donald Trump Is NOT Gerald Ford, And Michigan Will NOT Go To Republican Party, And Hillary Clinton Visit Insures That!

Donald Trump visited Grand Rapids, Michigan a few days ago, in a desperate attempt to win that state’s electoral votes, the state of Gerald Ford, our 38th President.

Hillary Clinton will visit it today, Monday, in her last full day of Presidential campaigning.

There is no debate that Gerald Ford, a decent man, a moderate conservative Republican, a principled President who is too often underrated, would NOT endorse Donald Trump, were he alive, any more than a whole slew of Republicans, alive and dead–including George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, Colin Powell, Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham and innumerable others who are living, and such past Republicans as Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, along with Ford.

Donald Trump could not walk in the shoes of Gerald Ford, and one can be sure his wife Betty would be leading the denunciation of misogynist, sexist, sexual abuser Donald Trump!

Donald Trump is a total disaster for the Republican Party and its heritage, and one can be sure that Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Dwight D. Eisenhower are sobbing right now at what has happened to their party!

The Biggest Landslide Victories In Presidential Election History Since 1900

The biggest landslide victories in Presidential Election history since 1900 would be the following in chronological order:

The Election Of 1904–Theodore Roosevelt vs Alton B. Parker

The Election of 1920–Warren G. Harding vs James Cox

The Election of 1924–Calvin Coolidge vs John W. Davis and Robert La Follette Sr.

The Election Of 1928–Herbert Hoover vs. Alfred E. Smith

The Election of 1932–Franklin D. Roosevelt vs Herbert Hoover

The Election of 1936–Franklin D. Roosevelt vs Alf Landon

The Election of 1964–Lyndon B. Johnson vs Barry Goldwater

The Election of 1972–Richard Nixon vs George McGovern

The Election of 1984–Ronald Reagan vs Walter Mondale

Ten Most Divisive And Polarizing Elections In American History

As we near the end of an extremely divisive and polarizing election, it is a good time to look back and judge what were the ten most divisive and polarizing elections in American history.

Chronologically, they would be the following:

The Election of 1800 between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson

The Election of 1828 between John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson

The Election of 1860 between Abraham Lincoln, Stephen Douglas, John C. Breckinridge, and John Bell

The Election of 1876 between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel Tilden

The Election of 1884 between Grover Cleveland and James G. Blaine

The Election of 1896 between William McKinley and William Jennings Bryan

The Election of 1912 between Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and Eugene Debs

The Election of 1948 between Harry Truman, Thomas E. Dewey, Strom Thurmond, and Henry A. Wallace

The Election of 1968 between Richard Nixon, Hubert Humphrey, and George Wallace

The Election of 2000 between George W. Bush, Al Gore, Ralph Nader, and Pat Buchanan

“Policy Wonks” In The White House

It is uncommon to have a President who is a “policy wonk”, a person who delves into the details of policies.

After all, that is what White House staff and cabinet officers are for.

But yet, we have had “policy wonks” that have been President, and not always for the good.

Who among our Presidents clearly qualifies as a “policy wonk”?

Well, we have Abraham Lincoln, who spent innumerable hours a day trying to keep track of every detail of the Civil War.

Theodore Roosevelt put his eyes, ears, and hands into keeping track of everything imaginable, even after he left the Presidency.

Woodrow Wilson, as a good scholar, was intimately involved in every detail of his Presidency, until he suffered a stroke in the middle of his seventh year in the Presidency.

Franklin D. Roosevelt became a great detail man on every aspect of the New Deal and on foreign policy crises.

John F. Kennedy was always on top of everything going on in his administration.

Lyndon B. Johnson kept track of Great Society programs and the casualty counts in the Vietnam War, and was obsessive-complusive.

Richard Nixon was fanatical in keeping track of everything, including details of White House dinners, and that is a major reason why he taped every Oval Office conversation.

Jimmy Carter was obsessive in being intimately involved in his administration’s policies.

Barack Obama has, certainly, been a hands on President in every sense of the word.

And finally, it is clear that Hillary Clinton is a policy wonk, a very bright and perceptive woman, who will not let anything pass her by when she is elected President.

Danger Of Civil Disorder If Donald Trump Refuses To Accept Defeat, Which All Previous Losers Have Accepted With Grace And Dignity!

Throughout American history, there has been great emotions as battles for the Presidency go on, but at the end, when the election is over, the loser has always conceded with grace and dignity.

This includes the John Adams-Thomas Jefferson race in 1800, the first time an incumbent has lost to a challenger.

It includes the John Quincy Adams-Andrew Jackson Presidential races in 1824 and 1828.

It includes the Abraham Lincoln–Stephen Douglas–John C. Breckinridge–John Bell four way race on the eve of the Civil War in 1860.

It includes the hotly contested 1876 Presidential race between Rutherford Hayes and Samuel Tilden, resolved by the political deal known as the Compromise of 1877.

It includes the four way contested race of 1912 between Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and Eugene Debs.

It includes the upset election victory of Harry Truman against Thomas E. Dewey in 1948.

It includes the John F. Kennedy-Richard Nixon race in 1960, which Nixon thought might have been corrupt, but chose not to challenge.

It also includes the Presidential election of 2000, when Al Gore challenged the results in court, but then was graceful once the Supreme Court intervened in favor of George W. Bush.

And it includes the grace and dignity of John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012, when they lost to Barack Obama.

But now, we have had indications that Donald Trump will not concede, and will claim a “rigged” election if he loses, and this will only encourage civil disorder, and the potential for bloodshed and violence, and refusal to allow a peaceful transition to the inauguration and administration of Hillary Clinton.

This is not a laughing matter one iota, and a very worrisome matter!

Donald Trump Could Be On Way To Worst Major Party Candidate Popular Vote Percentage Since William Howard Taft In 1912 And John W. Davis In 1924!

As Donald Trump moves forward, proving ever more his ability to alienate traditional Republicans and conservatives, and his racism, nativism, misogyny, and xenophobia leading to a likely low percentage among African Americans, Hispanic and Latino Americans, Asian Americans, Muslim Americans, Jews, Social Justice Catholics, women, college educated, environmentalists, gays, disabled, and every other conceivable group, the likelihood that he might be on the way to the worst possible major party candidate popular vote percentage since 1912 and 1924 seems a strong possibility.

In 1912, President William Howard Taft, challenged by former President Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Party, ended up third, the only time a major party nominee ended up other than first or second, and only received 23.2 percent of the vote, winning 2 states and 8 electoral votes, and Woodrow Wilson winning the election. TR as the third party nominee won six states and 27.4 percent of the total national vote that year.

Once we get past that unusual situation, the next worst performance by a losing major party candidate is John W. Davis , who lost to Calvin Coolidge in 1924 and won only 28.8 percent of the total popular vote, winning twelve states and 136 electoral votes. However, Progressive Party candidate Robert M. La Follette Sr won 16.6 percent of the vote in that election.

Next was James Cox, who lost to Warren G. Harding in 1920, receiving only 34.2 percent of the vote, winning eleven states and 127 electoral votes.

Next was Alf Landon, who lost to Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1936, winning only 36.5 percent of the vote, and two states and 8 electoral votes.

Next was George H. W. Bush who won only 37.4 percent of the vote in 1992 against Bill Clinton, but Ross Perot won 18.9 percent of the vote that year as an Independent nominee. Bush won 18 states and 168 electoral votes in that election.

Next on the list is George McGovern who won 37.5 percent of the vote in 1972 against Richard Nixon, winning only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia and 17 electoral votes.

Next is Alton B. Parker who won 37.6 percent of the vote in 1904 against Theodore Roosevelt in 1904, but also won 13 states and 140 electoral votes.

Barry Goldwater, losing to Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, won only 38.5 percent of the vote, and had 6 states and 52 electoral votes.

Finally, President Herbert Hoover, losing to Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932, had only 39.7 percent of the vote, and won 6 states and 59 electoral votes.

So nine times, a major party nominee since the Civil War has won less than 40 percent of the total national popular vote, but with three times, 1912, 1924, and 1992, being complicated by a strong third party vote.

Five of these candidates who won less than 40 percent of the vote were Republicans—Presidents Taft, Hoover and the first Bush, and also Landon and Goldwater.

The other four were Democrats—Davis, Cox, McGovern, and Parker.

As We Have Oldest Combination Of Presidential Candidates In History, A Look Back At Three Candidates Younger Than TR And JFK!

At a time when we have the oldest combination of Presidential candidates in history, with Donald Trump being past 70, and Hillary Clinton to be 69 in October, let’s take a look back at three Presidential candidates who lost, but were all younger than Theodore Roosevelt, our youngest President at 42 years and almost eleven months when he succeeded the assassinated President William McKinley in 1901; and these three Presidential candidates also, therefore, younger than John F. Kennedy, our youngest elected President, who took the oath at 43 years and almost eight months.

Our youngest Presidential nominee of a major party in history is William Jennings Bryan of Nebraska, a former Congressman, who ran as the Democratic nominee for President in 1896 and 1900, when he was younger than TR or JFK. Bryan was 36 and 40 when he ran his first two of three Presidential races, and had he won, he would have been inaugurated 15 days short of his 37th and 41st birthdays.

Our second youngest Presidential nominee was John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, who was Vice President at age 36 under President James Buchanan from 1857-1861 but was actually 35 at the time of his election. He was the Southern Democratic nominee in 1860 at age 39 although he would have been 40 at the time of the inauguration, running against Republican Abraham Lincoln, Democrat Stephen Douglas, and Constitutional Union nominee John Bell. Breckinridge served in the US House before being Vice President, and later was part of the Confederate government and army during the Civil War, and later served in the US Senate from Kentucky.

Thomas E. Dewey of New York sought the Presidency for the first time in 1940, when he was 38, and serving as Manhattan County District Attorney, but was thought to be too young to be taken seriously. But in 1944, in his first of two Presidential campaigns, when New York Governor, he ran on the Republican Party line against Franklin D. Roosevelt, running for his fourth term as World War II was nearing its last months. Dewey would have been inaugurated about two months short of his 43rd birthday, had he won in 1944, making him about a month younger than TR when he became President.

Dewey was favored in his second round of Presidential candidacy in 1948, when he lost in an upset to Harry Truman, after all public opinion polls projected an easy win but at that point he would have been two months short of 47, at the time of inauguration.