William Jennings Bryan

Presidential Losers Who Ran Again, And Donald Trump!

It has been reported that a former Trump advisor is planning to convince Donald Trump NOT to run again in 2024.

According to the report, this person has, or will tell Trump, that he would not wish to be a two time loser for the Presidency, amidst the belief that Trump’s ego could not handle that idea.

Former two time Democratic Presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson (1952, 1956) is mentioned as the example of the most recent two time nominee who lost twice for the White House.

One would think that this advisor would have more knowledge than just mentioning Stevenson, as five other Presidential candidates lost either twice or three times.

These include Republican Thomas E. Dewey (1944, 1948); Democrat William Jennings Bryan (1896, 1900, 1908); and Whig Henry Clay (1824, 1832, 1844), along with Democrat Martin Van Buren (elected in 1836 but losing in 1840, and 1848 (Free Soil Party), and Federalist Charles C. Pinckney (1804, 1808).

All six of these two or three time losers had real credentials and validity, unlike Donald Trump, who will go down as the worst or near worst President in American history!

But also, Andrew Jackson lost the Presidency in 1824, but won in 1828 and 1832, and William Henry Harrison lost in 1836 but won in 1840.

Also, there is the example of Richard Nixon, who lost in 1960, but came back successfully in 1968 and 1972.

And finally, there is Grover Cleveland, elected in 1884, but losing reelection in the Electoral College in 1888, and yet coming back to a second nonconsecutive term in the White House in 1892!

National Conventions May Be Part Of History, Never To Return

It is now official: The two national conventions of the Democratic Party and Republican Party will not be held with large crowds, due to the CoronaVirus Pandemic, and it may be that the typical national convention format may now be part of American history, never to return.

National conventions in modern times have mostly been just coronations of the Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees. But there is no way to know whether in the future, that there might be a party divided as convention time arrives, as occurred in 1968 for the Democrats.

But with modern technology, it could be that saving money on conventions and focusing on the message being spread by the party nominees might be seen as a better use of funding.

Also, traveling the nation, which began with William Jennings Bryan in 1896, might no longer be the norm, as Joe Biden is doing an excellent job presenting his agenda in live speeches from home or specific locations, and then made available for cable and social media.

Too often, the constant traveling wears candidates down, and it would be better if the energy level could avoid exhaustion, which clearly shows in the last weeks of a Presidential campaign, particularly for the winner of the Presidency.

Permanent Change In Campaigning: The End Of The William Jennings Bryan Personal Campaigning Mode, 1896-2020

Presidential campaigning in the 19th century was based on newspaper reporting of the various candidates speaking up on public issues, and speaking to small local crowds in the area nearby the candidate’s home.

The “Front Porch” campaign was common, as best exemplified by William McKinley in 1896.

But the same year, his opponent, young and vigorous 36 year old William Jennings Bryan, traveled by train across much of the nation, an estimated 30,000 miles to meet voters at train stations.

That was a revolutionary change in Presidential campaigning, and ever since, Presidential contenders and candidates, and even incumbent Presidents, have gone to the people to promote their cause and inspire voting.

But now, 124 years since William Jennings Bryan, and in the age of the internet and the CoronaVirus Pandemic, a new way of campaigning has developed.

Regular, every day internet events by Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden are becoming common, and President Donald Trump, of course, gets regular cable coverage, as well as on the internet.

This is a turning point, and is likely to prevail from now on, and the one advantage that stands out is the saving of energy and lowering of the exhaustion level of all candidates, by avoiding constant travel and 18 hour days of campaigning.

It is often said that campaigning for President is more arduous than being President, and it rings true, so we may have seen the last hurrah of regular, sustained, in person campaigning.

It does not mean that the President or Presidential candidates will not appear in person, but likely much less often, and this will also help to protect the President and Presidential candidates from the danger of violence and potential assassination threats.

The Ultimate Age Battle Looking More Likely To Occur: Late 70s Male (Biden Or Sanders) Vs. Millennial Male (Buttigieg)

An amazing situation may be arising: a battle not over man against woman for the Democratic Presidential nomination, but instead a battle over age between one of two candidates, both of whom are the oldest ever to announce for President and be seen as serious potential candidates, and a candidate who would be by far the youngest President in American history, with only William Jennings Bryan in 1896 being an actually younger nominee.

This blogger is referring to Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders vs Pete Buttigieg.

Biden would be 78 and 2 months on Inauguration Day; Sanders 79 and four months on Inauguration Day; and Buttigieg 39 years and one day old on Inauguration Day.

Both Biden and Sanders are twice the age of Buttigieg.

Biden and Sanders were born in the World War II era, so they are not technically “Baby Boomers”, those born from the beginning of 1946 to the end of 1964, the era in which we have had three Presidents born in 1946 months apart, with Bill Clinton in August, George W. Bush in July, and Donald Trump in June; along with Barack Obama, born in August 1961.

Buttigieg is part of the Millennial generation born in the 1980s, born in 1982, alongside two other Millennial candidates for President, Eric Swalwell, born in 1980; and Tulsi Gabbard, born in 1981.

South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg: A New Rising Star In The Presidential Race

A new rising star in the Democratic Presidential race is South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg (pronounced Buddhajudge) who has been the mayor of this mid sized city/ college town since 2012, and has won both four year terms handily with 74 and 80 percent of the vote in his two races.

We have never had a small city mayor elected President directly, and only three Presidents have been mayors, including Andrew Johnson of Greeneville, Tennessee; Grover Cleveland of Buffalo, New York; and Calvin Coolidge of Northampton, Massachusetts, but with Johnson and Coolidge succeeding to the Presidency upon the death of Abraham Lincoln and Warren G. Harding, and none of them in office as mayor for what is now seven years for Buttigieg.

If Buttigieg were to become President, he would be the second Indianan after Benjamin Harrison to become President, but with six Indianans being Vice President (four Republicans and two Democrats)—Schuyler Colfax under Ulysses S. Grant; Charles Fairbanks under Theodore Roosevelt; Dan Quayle under George H. W. Bush; Mike Pence under Donald Trump; Thomas Hendricks under Grover Cleveland, first term; and Thomas Marshall under Woodrow Wilson. Additionally, William English ran with Democrat Winfield Scott Hancock in 1880, and John Kern ran with William Jennings Bryan in 1908.

Also, if Buttigieg were to become President, he would be the first gay President, and also have a husband, who would become First Gentleman, instead of Bill Clinton, who would have had that title if his wife, Hillary Clinton, had won the White House in 2016.

Additionally, he would be, by far, the youngest President at age 39 and one day old on Inauguration Day, 2021, making him about three years and ten and a half months younger than Theodore Roosevelt, and four years and seven and a half months younger than John F. Kennedy.

Buttigieg is impressive as a successful and popular Mayor of South Bend, who has improved the city during his mayoralty; and as a graduate of Harvard University, he went on to be a Rhodes Scholar at Pembroke College of Oxford University in Great Britain. He also served in the US Navy at the rank of Lieutenant, and was a Naval Intelligence Officer who served in the war in Afghanistan, and is still in the Naval Reserve.

Also of note is that Buttigieg won the competition for the “JFK Profiles In Courage Essay Contest” in 2000, writing about the integrity and courage of then Independent Congressman Bernie Sanders, and traveled to the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library to accept the award from Caroline Kennedy, and met other members of the Kennedy family. Buttigieg had been valedictorian of his high school class, and was a member of Phi Beta Kappa at Harvard University, and graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard with a degree in History and Literature.

The Potential Exists For Youngest President In American History To Be Elected In 2020!

With disillusionment with “the older generation” widespread, the possibility now exists that America could elect a President in 2020 who could be younger than any President in American history.

Theodore Roosevelt succeeded to the Presidency at age 42 years and 10.5 months in 1901, upon the assassination of President William McKinley.

And John F. Kennedy was the youngest elected President, taking the oath of office at age 43 years and 7.5 months in 1961.

We have also had three younger Presidential nominees of a major party who lost their campaigns for the Presidency:

Thomas E. Dewey in the 1944 election, who would have been 42 years and 10 months if he had taken the oath in 1945

John C. Breckinridge in the 1860 election, who would have been 40 years and 1.5 months if he had taken the oath in 1861

William Jennings Bryan in the 1896 and 1900 elections, who would have been 36 years and 11.5 months and 40 years and 11.5 months respectively, if he had taken the oath in 1897 and 1901.

Now, in the upcoming election for President in 2020, there are seven theoretical candidates who would be younger than TR and JFK.

They include:

Congressman Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, who would be 42 and three months on Inauguration Day

Congressman Joe Kennedy III of Massachusetts, who would be 40 and three and a half months on Inauguration Day

Congressman Eric Swalwell of California, who would be 40 and two months on Inauguration Day

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, who would be 39 and nine months on Inauguration Day

Former Missouri Secretary of State Jason Kander, who is running to be Mayor of Kansas City, Missouri, in June 2019, who would be 39 and eight months on Inauguration Day

South Bend, Indiana Mayor (since 2012) Pete Buttigieg, who would be 39 and one day old on Inauguration Day

Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg, who has no political experience, who would be 36 and eight months old on Inauguration Day

The odds of any of these seven being the Democratic nominee are very long, and highly unlikely, as four are members of the House of Representatives (and only James A. Garfield was ever elected to the Presidency from the lower house); and two are or will be Mayors, and only Andrew Johnson, in Greeneville, Tennessee; Grover Cleveland, in Buffalo, New York: and Calvin Coolidge in Northampton, Massachusetts were mayors, although Theodore Roosevelt ran for New York City Mayor in 1886, but lost.

Finally, Zuckerberg would only be the second person never in public office after Donald Trump, and seemingly, a real long shot. If Zuckerberg were to become President, he would be the youngest nominee ever, three and a half months younger than William Jennings Bryan in 1896.

Hillary Clinton’s New Memoir: Will It Destroy A Possible Future Candidacy Or Promote It?

Hillary Clinton’s new memoir on her Presidential campaign is out, and the question is whether it will destroy a possible future candidacy for President, or promote it.

Clinton certainly blames herself for some of the actions and statements that doomed her, but also places a lot of blame on others, including former FBI Director James Comey; her rival for the nomination, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont; Today Show Host Matt Lauer, who moderated a debate that she feels was poorly handled by him; and of course, Donald Trump.

She points out her belief that there was definite Russian collusion for Donald Trump; makes clear her disgust at Trump’s tactics during the campaign; makes clear her belief that Trump was and is totally unqualified on experience and judgment to be our President; and tells us she is not going anywhere into the distance, but will continue to speak up on issues and personalities, including on Donald Trump.

Clinton recognizes that millions love her and voted for her, and gave her a 2.85 million popular vote margin, but that millions others hate her with a passion, and that sexism played a major role in her defeat, along with disgust by many at her husband, Bill Clinton, even though millions of others admire and support her husband and his Presidency in the 1990s.

Clinton informs us that while she will continue to be part of public discourse, she will NOT run for President again, which seems totally sensible and rational.

While she has run twice already, there is no desire to match Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan, who ran and lost three times; or Thomas E. Dewey and Adlai Stevenson, who ran and lost two times.

It is indeed time for fresh leadership, and so the idea of Bernie Sanders at age 79 in 2020 running for President is a terrible idea, and even Joe Biden, who this blogger loves, and believes that he would have defeated Donald Trump had he been the nominee, running again at age 78 in 2020, is not a good way to go.

Rather, we need YOUNGER leadership, such as Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut; Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti; Senator Kamala Harris of California; Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey; Former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro of Texas; Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom of California (running for Governor in 2018); Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota; Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York; Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon; Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York; Governor John Hickenlooper of Colorado; Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio; Senator Mark Warner of Virginia; Senator Al Franken of Minnesota; Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia; and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, among others.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is also talked about, as with Sanders and Hillary Clinton, but being in the 70s by 2020 makes her NOT a good choice, and she is also extremely controversial, and would be unlikely to gain any more support in the proper places and states to be elected President, because if anything, she is more vehement and more controversial to many than Sanders or Clinton.

Again, we need NEW leadership, with a preference for the YOUNGER part of the above group.

“Change” Elections: 1800, 1828, 1860, 1896, 1912, 1932, 1960, 1968, 1980, 2000, 2008, And Now 2016?

America has now had 58 Presidential elections, and it can now be said that 12 of them, about 20 percent, have been transformational elections.

In 1800, for the first time. the “opposition” won the Presidency, when Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams.

In 1828, the “common man”, Andrew Jackson, was elected over John Quincy Adams, and all white males over 21, whether or not property owners, were able to vote, and Jackson was perceived as representing the western frontiersman and the urban worker.

In 1860, Abraham Lincoln’s victory ushered in a new political party, the Republican Party, as dominant for the next half century, and the Civil War developed out of the split over slavery and its expansion between the Union and the Confederacy. But the sectionalism of that period still exists in many ways in 2017.

In 1896, William McKinley’s victory over William Jennings Bryan promoted the growth of industry and urbanizastion over the previously predominant agricultural and rural nature of America, but in reality, that conflict still exists in 2017.

In 1912, the high point of progressive reform, and the evolution of government playing a major role in the economy from that point on, became a long term reality, with three Presidents–the past President Theodore Roosevelt; the incumbent President William Howard Taft; and the future President Woodrow Wilson—all competing in promoting what one could call the most reform oriented election, with all three Presidents being “progressive” to different degrees.

In 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s victory over Herbert Hoover, was the time of the beginning of Democratic Party dominance, and ever bigger national government, even beyond the Progressive Era of the early 20th century.

In 1960, the election of John F. Kennedy was the triumph of overcoming the “religion issue”, as our first non Protestant President, a Roman Catholic from Massachusetts, was accomplished.

In 1968, the election of Richard Nixon marked the beginning of a turn to the Right, although Nixon actually continued and expanded elements of the Great Society of Lyndon B. Johnson in domestic affairs.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan’s victory marked the sharpest turn to the Right since Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s, and began an era of conservative government, that in many respects, continued under his successors, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

In 2000, the Supreme Court intervention in the Florida vote count, and the awarding of Florida to George W. Bush by 537 votes, giving him the Presidency, was a revolutionary change that changed the course of history, when Al Gore won the popular vote by more than a half million, and with the economy having improved during the Clinton years, should have led to Gore in the White House.

In 2008, Barack Obama’s victory over John McCain was a sharp turn to the left after what were arguably 40 years of conservative government to different degrees, including under Democrats Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and Obama overcame the race issue, in becoming the first African American President.

And now, in 2016, Donald Trump’s victory MIGHT be a sign of another “change” election, with the white working class voting for Trump, giving him the victory in the Electoral College, even though rival Hillary Clinton won the biggest popular vote margin of a losing candidate (2.85 million), greater than many Presidents won on their road to the White House,

But it may eventually be seen as a “fluke” election, and may not be long lasting, and only time and events will tell us what the reality is.

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

Utah, The Mormon State, Could Vote Democratic For First Time Since 1964, When They Voted Against Barry Goldwater

Utah, the Mormon state, has had an interesting history in their voting patterns on the Presidential elections.

Coming into the Union in 1896, Utah voted for Democrat William Jennings Bryan that year; for Woodrow Wilson in his second term bid in 1916; for Franklin D. Roosevelt four times in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944; for Harry Truman in 1948; and for Lyndon Johnson in 1964 (over Barry Goldwater).

So if Utah goes for Hillary Clinton, which now seems likely, it will be the first time in 52 years.

With Utah politicians, including Senator Mike Lee, Congressman Jason Chaffetz, and former Governor Jon Huntsman condemning Donald Trump, and with Mitt Romney, the most famous Mormon and 2012 Republican Presidential nominee, being vehemently anti Trump from the beginning of the 2016 Presidential race, it is seen as a blow to Trump having any chance to keep that state loyal to the Republican Party, which is natural in the past half century. Realize that Romney won 3-1 over Barack Obama four years ago!