This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, Oct. 15, 2012 - We are in the midst of another presidential election, and many Americans are complaining about all of the personal attacks that are being leveled at the candidates. Many would say that presidential elections are nastier than in the past and are getting more and more bitter.
But it seems to me that, for the most part, the Obama and Romney camps are focusing on the major issues of the day such as unemployment, health care, taxes and the Middle East and are avoiding personal attacks on one another. Sure, the Republicans question Obama’s birthplace and the Democrats assert that Romney outsourced U.S. jobs while at Bain Capital. But a review of U.S. election history shows that many presidential campaigns were far nastier than the current one.
Here are some examples:
Election of 1800
This was the first bitter one. In 1800, the Federalists claimed Jefferson was a “deist” who didn’t completely believe in the Bible. They argued that if Jefferson was elected, “religion would be destroyed and immorality would flourish.” At the same time, Jefferson’s supporters alleged that the Federalist candidate, John Adams, had sent Gen. Pinckney to England to bring home four mistresses for him and the general. The pious Adams quipped, “If this be true General Pinckney has kept them all to himself and cheated me out of my two.” Jefferson won the election.
Election of 1828
In 1828, the Whig party proclaimed that Andrew Jackson was, among other things, a drunkard, a gambler and a murderer. But the most hurtful accusation was that his wife, Rachel, was a bigamist because she had married Jackson before her divorce from her first husband was final. She died shortly after Jackson’s election; and he blamed the Whig candidate, John Quincy Adams, for her death.
Election of 1836
In this contest, the Whigs portrayed the Democrat Martin Van Buren as a “dandy” who wore corsets, behaved like a “frail sister” and they said it was hard to tell from his appearance if he was a man or a woman (the mutton chops should have been a dead give away). The girlie man won anyway.
Election of 1852
During this campaign, the Whigs called the Democratic candidate, Franklin Pierce, a drunkard and “a hero of many a well fought bottle.” Pierce won the election but lost the battle of the bottle as he eventually drank himself to death.
Election of 1872
Not surprisingly in 1872 the Democrats characterized the hard drinking Ulysses S. Grant as a drunkard (more specifically a stupid drunkard). The Republicans countered by claiming that the Democrat contender, Horace Greeley, was a vegetarian and a brown bread eater (I’m not making this up). They also asserted that he was an atheist and a “free lover.” Greeley lost, as I assume the drinkers and meat eaters voted for Grant and the “free lovers” were probably too busy to vote.
The harshness of this campaign appears to have taken its toll on the Greeleys as Horace and his wife both died within weeks of him losing the election.
Election of 1884
No serious issues were discussed in 1884. Instead the Republicans made fun of Democrat Grover Cleveland’s waistline (he was the Chris Christie of his day). Grover’s opponents also brought up the fact that he had fathered a child out of wedlock. Cleveland admitted it and when the Republicans would chant “Ma Ma where’s my Pa,” the Cleveland supporters would shout back, “He’s gone to the White House, ha ha ha.” The issue soon faded.
Bill Clinton could have learned from Grover’s honesty.
The Cleveland people painted the Republican candidate James Blaine as a liar. They would sing, “Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine the continental liar from the state of Maine.”
The Democrats won the election presumably because they were better chanters.
Election of 1928
In this election, the Republican, Herbert Hoover, was accused of being a naturalized British citizen and his opponents claimed that he once cheated a Chinese man out of a fortune in a mining dispute.
At the same time the Republicans called Hoover’s opponent Al Smith a “Rum Soaked Romanist.” Smith was the first Catholic candidate of a major party; and he was openly opposed to prohibition. Rumors were spread that if Smith was elected the pope would relocate the Holy See to the United States and that Protestant marriages would be annulled and their children would be declared bastards. Hoover won in a landslide; and America had to live through the first years of the Great Depression without the comfort of booze.
Given this historical perspective, I think that so far the election of 2012 is rather tame. Perhaps we are becoming a more civilized people … just kidding.
John C. Wade, Wildwood, is a chief financial officer, amateur historian and self-proclaimed expert on the U.S. presidents. Wade is on a number of not-for-profit boards in St Louis including the World Affairs Council and Meds & Foods for Kids. He is a Churchill Fellow and on the board of governors of the National Churchill Museum.