|
|
|
| Current Issue |
|
|
| Resources |
|
|
|
Did the History of 1840 Repeat Itself in 1992?
| Article
# : |
10944 |
|
|
Section : |
MODERN THOUGHT
|
| Issue
Date : |
5 / 1993 |
4,684 Words |
| Author
: |
Gary A. Feld
Gary A. Feld is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of
Government at Georgetown University. |
On November 3, the American public elected William Jefferson Clinton to be the forty-second president of the United States. Even before Clinton's midnight arrival on the stage in Little Rock, Arkansas, Washington's political pundits had established the latest historical analogy for the 1992 election: "There you go again, 1960." A young, good-looking, moderate, football-playing candidate, surrounded by tough politicos, eggheads, movie stars, and the legendary FOBs (Friends of Bill), wins a narrow popular vote victory. And by sheer force of personality and love of political combat, the new president conquers Washington and inspires a new generation of Americans. It's deja Camelot all over again. All Bill Clinton is missing are the military buddies to fill various government posts in the executive branch.
Of course, this rush to analogize was hardly surprising to observers of America's political process, for throughout the 1992 presidential election campaign historical analogies were almost as popular as public opinion polls. Beginning from the weeks leading up to the New Hampshire primary, the campaign was variously compared to that of 1988, 1968, and to any other year with a brokered convention. This latter scenario envisioned a deadlocked Democratic convention, a caucusing party elite, and a movement to draft New York Gov. Mario Cuomo.
When a third candidate muddied the track of the traditional two-ticket race, political handicappers again searched for the best analogy. Would 1992 mirror 1824, when the major candidates split the electoral vote, forcing the House of Representatives to choose the president on a state-by-state basis? Or would it be a reincarnation of Teddy Roosevelt and his 1912 Bull Moose Party? Would businessman Ross Perot and President George Bush split the Republican vote--as did Roosevelt and President William Taft in 1912--and allow the Democrats to occupy the White House after many years?
After Perot dropped out and the fall campaign reverted to a two-man race, both major candidates seized upon the latest analogy. This time to a particular person: Would the real Harry Truman please stand up?
All analogies, by definition, are flawed, some less to than others. The presidential election most resembling 1992 is not 1988, or 1968, or 1824, or 1912, or 1948, or even 1960. It is, rather, than 1840 "Log-Cabin and Hard Cider Campaign." In that year, President Martin Van Buren faced reelection. Four years earlier, as the incumbent vice president, Van Buren had won a landslide victory, largely on the coattails of
...
Read Full Article
Look for this article in Ask.com
|
|
