Presidential Election Of 1932

Third Term Presidents: The Truth And The Historical “Might Have Beens”!

Ronald Leave a comment

Anyone who studies American history knows that the 22nd Amendment, added to the Constitution in 1951, prevents any future President from serving more than two complete terms by election or a total of ten years by succession in the last two years of the Presidential term.

Only Franklin D. Roosevelt served more than eight years in the Presidency, a total of 12 years and 39 days, having been elected four times (1932, 1936, 1940, 1944), and this fact causing the opposition Republicans, when they controlled the 80th Congress in 1947-48, to pass the 22nd Amendment in 1947, and send it on to the state legislatures for ratification.

However, Ulysses S. Grant in 1876; Theodore Roosevelt in reality in 1912 as a third party (Progressive Bull Moose) candidate; Woodrow Wilson in 1920; and Harry Truman in 1952 considered a third term.

Additionally, it is clear that Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1960, Ronald Reagan in 1988 and Bill Clinton in 2000 would have won a third term if it had been allowed and they had agreed to seek it , with George H. W. Bush being the beneficiary of Reagan in 1988, and Al Gore being the beneficiary of Clinton in 2000, winning a larger margin of popular vote victory than any of the four cases of popular vote victory but Electoral College loss!

Also, if one considers popular vote victories of Andrew Jackson in 1824 and Grover Cleveland in 1888, but in each case losing the Electoral College, that could have meant three terms for Jackson (1824, 1828, 1832) and for Cleveland (1884, 1888, 1892)!

So if things had been different, instead of only FDR having a third and fourth term, we could have had Andrew Jackson, Ulysses S. Grant, Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton having third terms in the Presidency!

Multiple Losing Presidential Candidacies, And Those Who Lost, Then Won The Presidency

Ronald 2 Comments

The history of multiple candidacies for the Presidency is an interesting one, with five candidates being nominated more than once and losing each time, and five candidates being nominated more than once, and losing before winning the White House (with unusual circumstances for Grover Cleveland)

Those who ran multiple times and continued to lose are:

Charles Pinckney, Presidential Elections of 1804 and 1808
Henry Clay, Presidential Elections of 1824, 1832, and 1844
William Jennings Bryan, Presidential Elections Of 1896, 1900, and 1908
Thomas E. Dewey, Presidential Elections of 1944 and 1948
Adlai Stevenson, Presidential Elections of 1952 and 1956

Those who ran multiple times and first lost, and then won the Presidency are (with unusual case of Grover Cleveland described below):

Thomas Jefferson, Presidential Elections of 1796, 1800 and 1804
Andrew Jackson, Presidential Elections of 1824, 1828 and 1832
William Henry Harrison, Presidential Elections of 1836 and 1840
Grover Cleveland, Presidential Elections of 1884, 1888, and 1892 (winning in 1884, losing in 1888, winning in 1892)
Richard Nixon, Presidential Elections of 1960, 1968 and 1972

Also, Jackson and Cleveland won the popular vote in the elections they lost in the Electoral College, so both actually won the popular vote three times, the only candidates to do that, other than Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won the popular vote and electoral vote four times, in the Presidential Elections of 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944!

Additionally, Martin Van Buren ran a third time in 1848 on the Free Soil Party line and lost; and Theodore Roosevelt ran a second time in 1912 on the Progressive Party line and lost.

Republicans Claim Obama-Biden Are More Nasty And Divisive Than In Any Presidential Campaign In History: Really?

Ronald 13 Comments

The Republican Party is complaining, from Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan on down, that Barack Obama and Joe Biden are more nasty and divisive than in any Presidential campaign in history! Really?

Obviously, the Republicans have no knowledge or sense of history!

The Election of 1800 was NOT nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1828 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1860 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1896 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1912 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1932 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1948 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1968 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1980 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 1992 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 2000 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 2004 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

The Election of 2008 was not nasty and divisive, heh?

In fact, beyond these MORE divisive elections, EVERY Presidential election is nasty and divisive!

What IS different is that this round, the Democrats are striking back aggressively, which often in the past did not happen, to the same level as the Republicans, who are always nasty and divisive, whether favored to win the election or not!

But both Barack Obama and Joe Biden have stuck to attacks on the issues, not personalities, as both have always said that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are good family men, decent people, but are wrong on the issues.

On the other hand, the Republicans have launched personal attacks on both Obama and Biden, making insulting comments about them, particularly Obama, questioning whether he is an American, wondering about his birthplace, playing the race card, and showing him disrespect. And now, Biden is being attacked that he may have “lost it”, ridiculing mistakes he makes, which are few and far between as compared to Mitt Romney throughout his Presidential campaign!

So what it comes down to is that GOP does not like an aggressive opposition on the issues and contradictions they have as their record. The answer is tough on them, as this is the “big time”, and no longer will the Democrats allow themselves to be disrespected and ridiculed without a strong, aggressive response!

Triumph Of Progressivism: A Turning Point Challenge Fifty Years Apart: 1912, 1964, 2012!

Ronald 6 Comments

The battle between conservatism and progressivism/liberalism has been an never ending struggle throughout American history, going back to the time of Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, and the creation of the first political party system in the Federalist Era of the 1790s.

After a half century of conservatism in charge in the Gilded Age and early Progressive Era, in 1912, we finally had the triumph of progressivism with the election of Woodrow Wilson, and the stellar second place finish of Theodore Roosevelt on the Progressive Party line. Wilson proceeded to promote economic and social reforms, partly based on Roosevelt’s ideas, and partly his own, and much of what was accomplished in the second decade of the 20th century remains with us today.

Reversion to Gilded Age mentality occurred under GOP Presidents in the 1920s and early 1930s, and the Great Depression led to a smashing landslide for Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s and 1940s, with the New Deal expanding much of what TR and Wilson had advocated, and additional ideas growing out of the economic crisis.

Harry Truman attempted more reforms in the late 1940s and early 1950s, but most were stymied by a conservative resurgence, and a similar situation existed in the Eisenhower years, and the Kennedy Presidency.

But when Lyndon B. Johnson came in after the assassination of President Kennedy, he dedicated himself to accomplishment of what FDR, Truman, and Kennedy could not achieve, and to expand beyond the New Deal of FDR with the Great Society.

The Republican Party and conservatives saw an opportunity to negate all of the economic and social changes of TR, Wilson and FDR, and Barry Goldwater, the 1964 right wing opponent of Johnson, declared war on the New Deal, and the result was a landslide defeat, and the greatest expansion of progressivism yet in our history.

By the time that Ronald Reagan won a victory for conservatives in 1980, and continuing through George W. Bush leaving in 2009, Republicans and the right wing set out to reverse the Great Society and New Deal, one program at a time, with Democrats being able to stop complete destruction, but Republicans and conservatives nipping away at one area of policy after another, and in the process increasing our national debt from $1 trillion when Reagan became President to $10.5 trillion when George W. Bush left office.

Barack Obama came in with the intention of solidifying the New Deal and Great Society, and also bringing a new Progressive Era. And now Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are declaring war on everything that has been done by the federal government in the past century—from TR, to Wilson, to FDR, to Truman, even to Ike, to JFK, LBJ, even Nixon, Carter, even George H. W. Bush, to Clinton, to Obama–in their desire to make America ever more an oligarchy, a corporate dominated nation, and to destroy the middle class and the poor, and return us to the Gilded Age that began in the 1870s!

So 2012 is the most ideological election since 1964, as that election was the most ideological election since 1912!

The future of every social and economic reform of the past century is at stake in this election, and progressives and liberals cannot afford to sit on the sidelines, as this is as Theodore Roosevelt dramatically called it a century ago, an ultimate battle of Armageddon for the future of America!

Paul Ryan Always To Be National Figure In Future No Matter What Happens In November!

Ronald Leave a comment

Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan will NEVER be a minor, forgettable public figure ever again!

He will now have Secret Service protection during the upcoming campaign, and will still need some protection after, due to the controversial nature of running for national office.

Every Vice Presidential loser remains a national figure, and is often thought of as a future Presidential candidate.

Witness Sarah Palin, John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, and the earlier Presidential candidacies of Jack Kemp, Lloyd Bentsen, and Bob Dole as evidence, and also the later candidacies for President of Sargent Shriver and Edmund Muskie as further proof!

And being only 42, and even rumored to have thought of running for President from the House of Representatives in this year’s race, face the facts—Paul Ryan will be a major player in the future of American politics!

And finally, Franklin D. Roosevelt lost the Vice Presidency in 1920 and became President in 1932!

Speculation About Reported Alliance Between Mitt Romney And Ron Paul: Could It Lead To Rand Paul Being Vice Presidential Running Mate Of Romney?

Ronald Leave a comment

Political pundits, including Joe Scarborough of MORNING JOE on MSNBC, have noticed what seems like a warm friendship between two Republican Presidential candidates, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Texas Congressman Ron Paul.

It has become obvious that Ron Paul has spent a lot of money on attack ads in various states against Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and now Rick Santorum, as each has become a major challenger to Mitt Romney. He has also attacked them on debate stages, as he did last night against Rick Santorum.

This seems very weird to many observers, as Mitt Romney is not a libertarian or a believer in the withdrawal of America’s involvement overseas, which Ron Paul stands for.

And Ron Paul is too old to be considered as a running mate, but then it is recognized that his son, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, who is 49 years old, has already said he would be honored to be considered for Vice President, a very strong hint that a deal could be struck to put Rand Paul in the Vice Presidential slot as a way to unite diverse elements of the GOP for November.

In many ways, it would be a “shotgun marriage”, but not the first in American history, as for instance, the team of Franklin D. Roosevelt and John Nance Garner in 1932; the team of Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon in 1952; the team of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson in 1960; and the team of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush in 1980, were not based on close friendship or ties between the Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees. They were done for maximum political advantage.

The problem with this possibility of Mitt Romney teaming with Rand Paul is that it puts Rand Paul and his extremist libertarian philosophy a potential heartbeat away from the Presidency, although the positive side for Romney is that it makes a Libertarian Party challenger less likely or, at least, less able to draw away votes if there is one, such as former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. Ron Paul has a lot of supporters, who could be drawn to support Mitt Romney, if he selected Rand Paul.

So this new rumor makes one think that it could be a way to help Romney clinch the nomination and have somewhat united support, but the thought of a possible President Rand Paul would be a radical change unacceptable to mainstream and centrist political attitudes.

President Vs. President In Presidential Elections: 14 Times and 20 Presidents

Ronald Leave a comment

On George Washington’s actual birthday, 280 years ago (1732), it is appropriate to ask how many times has there been a Presidential election in which two Presidents opposed each other?

The answer is 14 times, and a total of 20 Presidents have competed against a fellow Oval Office occupant, present or future!

Here are the details:

Presidential Elections of 1796 and 1800–John Adams vs Thomas Jefferson, with Adams first winning, and then Jefferson.

Presidential Elections Of 1824 and 1828–John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson, with Adams first winning (even though behind Jackson in popular votes), and then Jackson.

Presidential Elections of 1836 and 1840–Martin Van Buren vs William Henry Harrison, with Van Buren first winning, and then Harrison.

Presidential Elections of 1888 and 1892–Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland, with Harrison first winning (even though behind Cleveland in popular votes), and then Cleveland.

Presidential Election Of 1912–the only time three Presidents, past, present and future, ran against each other, with Woodrow Wilson defeating President William Howard Taft and former President Theodore Roosevelt (running on a third party line, the Progressive Party).

Presidential Election of 1932–Herbert Hoover vs Franklin D. Roosevelt, with FDR winning.

Presidential Election of 1960–John F. Kennedy vs Richard Nixon, with JFK winning, but Nixon later winning the Presidency in 1968.

Presidential Election of 1976–Jimmy Carter vs Gerald Ford, with Carter defeating President Ford.

Presidential Election of 1980–President Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan, with Reagan defeating President Carter.

Presidential Election Of 1992–President George H. W. Bush vs Bill Clinton, with Clinton defeating President Bush.

Of these 20 Presidents, only Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton–a total of five–never lost to their Presidential competitor, although it could be pointed out that FDR lost the Vice Presidency in 1920, a race that Warren G. Harding won for the White House, and that Ronald Reagan lost the Republican nomination for President to Gerald Ford in 1976!

So another trivia contest for those who are interested!

The Ten Most Important Presidential Elections In American History

Ronald 6 Comments

With Presidents Day coming on Monday, this is a good time to reflect on the 56 Presidential elections that this country has had, and to judge which ten are the most significant, path breaking elections.

Of course, there can be debate and disputes as to the judgment of this author and blogger, but here goes, in chronological order.

Presidential Election of 1789–the selection by the Electoral College of our first President, George Washington, the absolutely right choice for the beginning of our nation under the Constitution, as Washington set important precedents for the future, and had no ambition to grab power long term.

Presidential Election Of 1800–the first time we had an opposition party come to power with grace, and without violence, setting a standard for the future, as Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams, and the dispute between him and Vice President Aaron Burr, who claimed a tie in the Electoral College, was settled peacefully as well, and caused a modifying of the Electoral College process.

The Presidential Election of 1828–the first one decided by popular vote synchronizing with the electoral vote, and giving the country a so called “Common Man” in the Presidency, Andrew Jackson, representing city workers and frontiersmen alike.

Presidential Election of 1860–leading to the election of Abraham Lincoln, who set out to preserve the Union at all costs, and wielded power in a controversial, but thoughtfully considered way, through four years of the Civil War.

Presidential Election Of 1912–the triumph of progressivism, the recognition that government’s role had been changed irrevocably in a country that had been transformed from an agricultural to an industrial nation, had tripled in population since the Civil War, had become a multi ethnic nation, and had recognized the need for the regulation of capitalism in the public good, as well as political reforms and social justice. And it was the most exciting election, as three Presidents, past (Teddy Roosevelt), present (William Howard Taft), and future (Woodrow Wilson) competed against each other.

Presidential Election Of 1932–the triumph of Franklin D. Roosevelt at the worst moments of the Great Depression, offering hope and action (the New Deal) to revive the spirits of the nation, and have the American people believe in the future. Without his victory, there might have been social revolution and bloodshed on a large scale.

Presidential Election of 1960–witnessing the first Catholic President elected (John F. Kennedy) and the promotion of idealism and a new beginning in the advancement of social justice and political reform.

Presidential Election Of 1964–the victory of liberalism with the election of Lyndon B. Johnson, and the defeat of Barry Goldwater and conservatism, therefore insuring the continuation of the New Deal, and the evolution of the Great Society.

Presidential Election Of 1980–seeing the triumph of conservatism under Ronald Reagan, with some modifications of the New Deal and Great Society, and great speeches, but not the conservative “heaven” that many imagine it was, but making Reagan a national icon like Washington, Lincoln and FDR.

Presidential Election Of 2008–witnessing the first African American President (Barack Obama), and his work to provide health care reform, preserve the New Deal and Great Society, and overcome the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

The author welcomes discussion and debate on this post!