James K. Polk

Important To Remember: No Wartime President Has Been Defeated For Reelection!

An interesting point to remember with 80 days left to the Presidential election, and just two days to August 20, precisely five months to the inauguration!

NEVER has a President in wartime been defeated, including two times when war clouds hovered, but we were not technically at war!

Witness the following:

James Madison, the War of 1812, reelected in 1812
Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War, reelected in 1864
Woodrow Wilson, World War I, not at war but nearing it, reelected in 1916
Franklin D. Roosevelt, World War II, not at war but nearing it, reelected in 1940, and then at war, reelected in 1944.
Lyndon B. Johnson, using the Vietnam War issue through the Gulf of Tonkin, elected in 1964
Richard Nixon, Vietnam War, reelected in 1972
George W. Bush, Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, reelected in 2004

This list does not include James K. Polk, who chose not to run for reelection AFTER the end of the Mexican War in 1848; William McKinley, reelected AFTER the Spanish American War’s end, in 1900; Harry Truman, who chose not to run in 1952 during the Korean War; Lyndon B. Johnson, who chose not to run during the Vietnam War in 1968; and George H. W. Bush, who was triumphant during the Persian Gulf War, but then lost 18 months later for reelection in 1992, due to the bad economy and the candidacy of Ross Perot helping Bill Clinton to win in a three way race.

So the odds of Barack Obama winning reelection with the Afghanistan War raging are excellent!

Which Presidents Would Belong On A Second Mount Rushmore?

This morning, on MORNING JOE on MSNBC, there was a fascinating three hour discussion on the American Presidency, to commemorate the Fourth of July national holiday.

Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski had many distinguished guests, journalists and historians, to analyze the office and the 43 men who have held that position.

Three distinguished historians–Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jon Meacham, and Evan Thomas–gave their view of which Presidents would be appropriate for a second Mount Rushmore, if such a momument were ever to be built in South Dakota or elsewhere.

Their selections were certainly fascinating, controversial, and highly debatable.

Goodwin’s list was Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Ronald Reagan.

Meacham’s list was Andrew Jackson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy,and Ronald Reagan.

Thomas’s list included Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush.

So FDR and Reagan are on all three lists, and would certainly please progressives and Democrats on the one hand, and conservatives and Republicans on the other hand.

But there the disagreements begin, and lead to a total of six other Presidents being listed–Jackson, Truman, Ike, JFK, LBJ, and Bush No. 41.

One wonders if there has been disrespect shown toward Woodrow Wilson, who had such a long range impact on the office of the Presidency, although there has been a lot of criticism directed toward him over the years.

One also wonders about the famous “obscure” President, James K. Polk, who gained more territory in his one term than anyone other than Thomas Jefferson.

Also, the question arises whether Bill Clinton will see his historical stock rise as the years go by, to the point of possibly being a candidate for a second Mount Rushmore.

If this author and blogger were queried about his choices, the Presidents he would select would be to agree totally with Doris Kearns Goodwin: FDR, Truman, LBJ, and Reagan!

But now the reader can chime in with his or her views about a second Mount Rushmore, and the more the merrier!

The Wartime Presidency: One Out Of Every Three Presidents!

America has had 43 Presidents, and a total of 14, or one third, have been wartime Presidents.

Some inherited wars, as Theodore Roosevelt and the Filipino Insurrection of 1899-1902; Harry Truman and World War II; Dwight D. Eisenhower and the Korean War; Richard Nixon and the Vietnam War; and Barack Obama and the Iraq War and Afghanistan War.

Others took us to war, believing it was necessary and unavoidable, including James Madison and the War of 1812; James K. Polk and the Mexican War; Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War; William McKinley and the Spanish American War; McKinley and the Filipino Insurrection; Woodrow Wilson and World War I; Franklin D. Roosevelt and World War II; Harry Truman and the Korean War; Lyndon B. Johnson and the Vietnam War; George H. W. Bush and the Gulf War; and George W. Bush and the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War.

Of these 14 wartime Presidents, one was a Democratic Republican (James Madison); seven were Republicans (Abraham Lincoln, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower; Richard Nixon, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush); and six were Democrats (James K. Polk, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson, Barack Obama).

Ranking Presidents Affected By Being A One Term Or Two Term President?

The game of ranking Presidents is a continuous topic among historians, political scientists, journalists, and ordinary citizens.

In the upcoming June issue of Presidential Studies Quarterly, Professor Curt Nichols, an assistant professor of political science at Baylor University in Texas, comes up with a new theory and premise about how Presidents are ultimately ranked in history.

Nichols used a statistical method known as regression analysis, utilizing Presidential ranking polls conducted by C Span, the Wall Street Journal, and the Siena Research Institute.

Each poll has different factors in judging Presidential leadership, with C Span having ten.

But Nichols says the rating score of Presidents is ultimately raised if the following six factors are considered:

Number of years served
Wartime leadership
If transformation of political landscape occurs in their term
If they are part of the Founding Fathers group
If they are considered “progressive” and pursue “equal justice for all”
If they are assassinated progressives

At the same time, two factors will decrease the rating scores of Presidents:

If the President is impeached, resigns, or has major political scandals during his administration
If they push the nation into political crisis or are unable to lift the country out of a political crisis

Going by this discussion, Nichols believes that IF Barack Obama is defeated for re-election, he will rank only as “average”, as number 22, between William McKinley and George H. W. Bush.

But Nichols also believes that If Barack Obama is re-elected to the Presidency, he could end up as high as number FOUR, behind Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington, and ahead of Thomas Jefferson!

There is lots of room for debate on the Nichols viewpoint, but it certainly will cause much more discussion and analysis of the men who have been President of the United States.

A few observations here:

If wartime Presidents have an edge, then why is James Madison, William McKinley, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush rated quite low on the rankings list generally accepted?

One term Presidencies that stick out as better include James K. Polk and John F. Kennedy.

Two term Presidencies that are seen negatively include James Madison, Ulysses Grant, Grover Cleveland, and George W. Bush.

So whether having a second term really helps raise the stature of a President is still very debatable.

And whether Barack Obama could end up ranked ahead of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton is something that will be hotly debated into the long term future.

Ten Other Presidential Elections That Transformed American History For Better Or Worse

In addition to what are considered the ten most important Presidential elections in American history, there are also ten other elections that transformed our history, as history would have been different had the results been the opposite of what they were.

In chronological order, these elections are as follows.

Presidential Election of 1844—If James K. Polk had not won over Henry Clay, the likelihood of gaining the Pacific Northwest by treaty with Great Britain, and gaining the Southwest by war with Mexico, together the greatest land expansion since the Louisiana Purchase under Thomas Jefferson, would have been far less likely. But also the Civil War might have been delayed without the battle over freedom or slavery in the Mexican Cession territories gained from the war.

Presidential Election of 1864—An election often ignored, if Abraham Lincoln had not won over General George McClellan, who he had fired from Union Army military leadership, the Civil War, in its late stages, might have ended differently in some form, hard to determine.

Presidential Election of 1876—If the Electoral Commission and Compromise of 1877, giving Rutherford B. Hayes victory over Samuel Tilden, had not occurred, after a disputed election result in Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina, there might have been civil war erupting all over again.

Presidential Election Of 1896—If William McKinley had not defeated William Jennings Bryan, there might have been no Spanish American War, no Filipino Insurrection, and no gaining of overseas colonies, as Bryan opposed the idea.

Presidential Election Of 1916—If Woodrow Wilson had not squeaked out a victory over Charles Evans Hughes, he had readied plans to hand over the Presidency to Hughes early, with the Secretary of State resigning, Hughes being named Secretary of State, the Vice President resigning, and then Wilson resigning. Wilson left behind a hand written memorandum to this effect, concerned about the transition of power as the dangers of World War I came closer to the possibility of American participation.

Presidential Election Of 1928—If Herbert Hoover had lost to Alfred E. Smith, the likelihood of a very different reaction to the onset of the Great Depression in 1929 might have led Smith to being the equivalent of Hoover’s successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and his New Deal.

Presidential Election of 1968—If Hubert Humphrey had defeated Richard Nixon, it is likely that the Vietnam War would have ended earlier, and that there would not have been a Watergate scandal, and instead a continuation of the Great Society begun by Lyndon B. Johnson.

Presidential Election of 1976—If Gerald Ford had defeated Jimmy Carter, it is likely that after 12 years of Republican control and growing economic and foreign policy challenges, that the Democrats would have retaken the White House in 1980, and there would have been no Ronald Reagan Presidency.

Presidential Election Of 1992–If George H. W. Bush had not had to deal with an economic recession and the third party challenge of Ross Perot, the second highest popular percentage third party effort in US history, it is very likely that Bill Clinton would never have been President.

Presidential Election of 2000—If the popular vote recount in Florida had been continued, and the Supreme Court had not intervened to declare the election over, then Al Gore would have become President instead of George W. Bush, and there might not have been a September 11 terrorist attack, the resulting war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and likely not a tremendous growth in the national debt from $5 trillion to $10 trillion

How much history would have been different if only the results of these elections had been other than what they were!

One Term Presidencies: Seven Significant Leaders Not Appreciated

Tomorrow marks one year to the inauguration of the next President of the United States, and the question arises whether Barack Obama will become another one term President.

Historically, those who have been one term Presidents and lost re-election have tended to go down in history as “losers”, “failures”, and as “insignificant” in American history.

But nothing could be further from the truth. Consider the following cases:

John Adams–one of the most significant Founding Fathers in the Revolution and Federalist Eras, but defeated by Thomas Jefferson in the first political party struggle.

John Quincy Adams–brilliant in diplomacy before his Presidency as one of our greatest Secretaries of State, and exceptional as a Congressman for nearly 18 years after his Presidency, fighting against the evil of slavery, but losing to Andrew Jackson.

William Howard Taft–much underrated President who also served later as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but losing to Woodrow Wilson, and even ending up behind his promoter, Theodore Roosevelt, who ran on a third party line, the Progressive Party, the greatest third party performance in American history.

Herbert Hoover–acknowledged as great humanitarian as aide to Woodrow Wilson during World War I, and as Secretary of Commerce under Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, but paralyzed by the Great Depression and slow to react to the massive crisis it presented.

Jimmy Carter–Despite major accomplishments in office, particularly in foreign policy, lost reelection to Ronald Reagan because of the Iranian hostage crisis, but pursued commitment to fighting disease and promoted diplomacy and free elections after his Presidency, and won the Nobel Peace Prize.

George H. W. Bush–very talented as Ambassador to China, United Nations Ambassador, and head of the Central Intelligence Agency before his Presidency, but despite his victory in the Gulf War, he was defeated due to the economic recession and the third party candidacy of Ross Perot, and lost to Bill Clinton.

Another one term President who chose NOT to run for re-election, of course, had a very successful term of office. James K. Polk gained the Oregon Treaty with Great Britain, giving America the Pacific Northwest states, and waged war with Mexico, gaining California and the Southwest states. Worn out by his labors, he chose not to run, and died 103 days after retirement, the shortest retirement period of any President in American history.

So the whole concept that one term Presidents do not matter is shown to be totally incorrect.

In Interview, Barack Obama Compares Himself In Accomplishments To Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, And Lyndon B. Johnson! Is That Appropriate?

President Obama has now compared his accomplishments after three years in office to three other Presidents–Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson.

This comment will stir much reaction and commentary, and it requires analysis and judgment, which will go on forever!

Certainly, Obama’s time in office has caused tremendous controversy and turmoil, but one could argue the same for Lincoln, FDR, and LBJ!

Assuming that the Supreme Court does not declare Obama’s Health Care plan unconstitutional, that achievement will stand out as one of the most profound in American history!

Obama also has saved the auto industry, prevented a Great Depression, and has brought about more reforms in his time in office than anyone except FDR, LBJ, and possibly Woodrow Wilson! He also has been extremely impressive in his attack on terrorism and Al Qaeda, and in ending the war in Iraq.

It is certainly true that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, and Ronald Reagan had a great significance in our history!

It is also true that even James K. Polk, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton had major accomplishments that will not be forgotten.

But in terms of pure legislative accomplishments, Obama must, at this point, rank with FDR and LBJ, and again possibly Wilson, and Lincoln always needs to be mentioned when talking about accomplishments, although for Lincoln, it was in time of the Civil War.

But it will be the whole record of Obama, not just the first three years, that will be part of the ultimate judgment on his tenure. If he is reelected, the odds of a favorable view of his Presidency will grow, while if he is defeated for a second term, his reputation will be dimmed, typical of one term Presidents.

Speakers Of The House Of Representatives: The Presidency And The Vice Presidency

With strong hints that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich of Georgia will likely be the first Republican to announce his candidacy for the Presidency, it makes one look back and see the history of the Speaker of the House and the office of the Presidency and the Vice Presidency.

Only one Speaker of the House has been elected President, James Polk in the 1844 election, after having served as Speaker from 1835-1839.

Two others who were Speaker were nominated for President and lost–Henry Clay (1811-1814, 1815-1820, 1823-1825)) who lost in 1824, 1832 and 1844; and James G. Blaine (1869-1875) who lost in 1884.

Another Speaker, Champ Clark (1911-1919) sought the nomination in 1912, was ahead in delegates at the Democratic National Convention, but lost the nomination to Woodrow Wilson.

Two others served as Vice President–Schuyler Colfax (1863-1869) who served under Ulysses Grant from 1869-1873; and John Nance Garner (1931-1933), who served under Franklin D. Roosevelt from 1933-1941.

Additionally, John Bell (1834-1835) ran for President on the Constitutional Union Party in the 1860 Presidential election which led to the victory of Abraham Lincoln.

So Gingrich would be the eighth Speaker to seek high office as President or Vice President, but would only be the second to reach that position were he to be elected in 2012. Don’t bet on it!

The Tea Party Nation, Religion, And America’s Presidents!

Judson Phillips, the founder of the Tea Party Nation, a specific Tea Party group, has condemned the Methodist Church for supporting the DREAM Act for children of illegal immigrants, for backing Obama health care which he considers “socialism”, and he says the church is the “First Church of Karl Marx”!

Realize that Mr. Phillips used to be a member of the Methodist Church, but left the church because it is involved in what he considers interference with separation of church and state!

It is alright if a religious group of the right gets involved in taking political stands, apparently, but if a more open minded, liberal church takes leadership on political controversies, that somehow is a sin!

Going on that basis, it means a third of our Presidents must have been “socialists” or followers of “Marxism”, as they were involved in faiths NOT conservative in their doctrine, or not connected to organized religion at all!

Let’s go through the list of 15 Presidents who do not fit Judson Phillips’ satisfaction on religious beliefs!

Four Presidents were Methodists, including James K. Polk, Ulysses S. Grant, William McKinley, and George W. Bush, plus Rutherford B. Hayes, who was unaffiliated and then Methodist later in life.

Three were unaffiliated throughout life, including Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson, with Grant and Hayes unaffiliated at times, and also Barack Obama.

Four Presidents were Unitarian, very far from traditional Christian religion, including John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Millard Fillmore, and William Howard Taft.

Also, we have had two Quaker (Society of Friends) Presidents, also out of the mainstream of Christianity–Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon.

So apparently these 15 Presidents were heretics “in league with the devil”, because they had a more open mind on organized religion, and took a more compassionate, social justice view of what religion is all about!

This is exactly what we need, a President who believes in tolerance and concern for those less fortunate, as no one can be considered truly “religious” who has a narrow minded, intolerant view of those who are different than them, or less fortunate in economic circumstances!

Is A Republican “Dark Horse” To Emerge In 2012 Presidential Race?

“Dark Horses”, candidates who are not thought of seriously and come from behind to win or be major factors in a political race, are a part of America’s political culture!

We have had several “dark horse” Presidential nominees of a major party, and four have become President, all Democrats–James K. Polk in 1844, Franklin Pierce in 1852, Woodrow Wilson in 1912, and Jimmy Carter in 1976!

Wendell Willkie, the 1940 GOP nominee for President, was also a “dark horse”, but lost the race to Franklin D. Roosevelt.

However, we had “dark horses” who excited the races in both parties in the past two presidential election cycles before flopping–Howard Dean in 2004 for the Democrats, and Mike Huckabee in 2008 for the Republicans!

So therefore, there are a few potential candidates for “dark horse” for the GOP for 2012! The candidates being talked about are primarily Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, and Haley Barbour.

But the names to watch for 2012 might include:

Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana, who has charisma, good looks, strong conservative and Tea Party credentials, and has had a leadership position in the House as Conference Chairman of the GOP.

Senator elect Marco Rubio of Florida, who is often called the Cuban Barack Obama in reverse, and is young, charismatic, good looking, has fervent support from conservatives and Tea Party people, and represents the largest state in population of any GOP potential candidate who is seen as a possible nominee.

Senator John Thune of South Dakota, who is charismatic, handsome, strong conservative, seen as best bet for any Senator seen as a possibility in a primarily competition among Governors and former Governors.

Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts, who is handsome, charismatic, and started the victory wave against the Democrats when he won the Senate seat of the late Ted Kennedy, but will have trouble being elected for a full term in Democratic dominated Massachusetts, so might run for President instead, although probably too moderate for the Republican base.

Could any of these four seriously become the Presidential nominee? Well, we have only had one Congressman go directly to the White House (James Garfield), and he was assassinated after only a few months in the Presidency! Both Rubio and Brown will have had very brief experience on the national level by 2012, similar however to Barack Obama!

Thune will have had eight years in the Senate, along with six previous years in the House of Representatives, so will be, by far, the most experienced nationally of any of these “dark horse” possibilities by 2012!

If one had to prognosticate who among these might have the best chance to emerge, were they to run, the best bet is that it would be John Thune, so it will be interesting to watch and see what happens to this group of potential candidates! Stay tuned! 🙂