|
|
| Top to bottom: Hayes, Cleveland, B. Harrison
|
Polk ran for office on a limited platform, making only a few campaign promises instead of presenting a major agenda as is common today. His main theme in the campaign was the territorial expansion of the United States, a policy known as “Manifest Destiny,” and a promise to reoccupy the Oregon territory, re-annex Texas, and acquire California.
Clay was the early front-runner, and expected to have an easy victory. However, his opposition to the annexation of Texas lost him support in the South, and a third party abolitionist candidate named James Bireny siphoned off enough support in the North to hurt Clay. The election was very personal with newspaper attacks calling Polk a coward and Clay a drunkard. The final result was close, Polk beat Clay by about 38,000 votes, and the unexpected candidate went on to become one of our most highly revered presidents.
1876: Most Disputed and Intense Election —Samuel Tilden
vs. Rutherford B. Hayes
The election of 1876 was perhaps the most disputed and intense election in U.S. history.
Samuel Tilden, the Democratic nominee, won the popular vote by more than 200,000 votes and in the Electoral College he appeared to have won 203 votes to Hayes 166. However, the Republican Party disputed the outcome of the election, claiming that blacks had been denied the right to vote in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida. In response, the election officials refused to credit the Democratic electors in those three states. The officials instead had the three states give their electoral votes to Hayes. Now the election was tied, with each candidate receiving 184 electoral votes. (Interestingly, the Republican Party paid for recounts in many of the counties.)
Chaos descended on the Capitol. The Democrats controlled the House, and the Republicans controlled the Senate. The Republicans knew if the election went to the House they would lose, so they recommended a bipartisan commission to study the election and certify the results. They also arranged it so that the commission would ensure a victory for Hayes.
The returns accepted by the Commission placed Hayes’s victory margin in South Carolina at 889 votes, making this the second-closest election in U.S. history, after the 2000 election, decided by 537 votes in Florida. Democrats, furious at the machinations of the Electoral Commission, refused to attend the inauguration. It had to be held in secret because the Republicans feared for Hayes’s life. The Democrats nicknamed Hayes, “His Fraudulency” and “His Accidency.”
1884: Slogans, Slogans, Slogans—James G. Blaine vs. Grover Cleveland
The 1884 election was based in large part on the integrity of the candidates. Cleveland supporters pilloried Blaine for his unethical business deals with the railroad industry and for being evasive when the deals were exposed. They chanted “Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, the Continental Liar from the state of Maine.”
Blaine’s backers attacked Cleveland for allegedly fathering an out-of-wedlock child. They employed the catchphrase “Ma, ma, Where’s my pa?” (In 1874, Cleveland had quietly accepted paternity for a child with a woman who had been involved with a number of men. He was paying his son’s child support when the story about his putative fatherhood publicly broke in 1884. His campaign staff asked him if the allegations were true and what they should do about it? Cleveland replied, “Tell the truth.” They did.)
The 1884 election was one of the closest in U.S. history. The Republican candidate, James G. Blaine, might have won if one of his supporters had kept his mouth shut. The Rev. Samuel Burchard called the Democratic Party the “party of rum, Romanism, and rebellion.” “Romanism” was a derogatory term. The slur alienated Catholic voters and they voted for Grover Cleveland — an independent-minded Democrat — who narrowly prevailed in the general election.
Cleveland lost his re-election bid but won after that. He is the only American president to serve two nonconsecutive terms.
1888: Nineteenth Century Dirty Tricks—Grover Cleveland
vs. Benjamin Harrison
The election of 1888 was rather nasty. The Republican Party not only attacked Cleveland’s war record, during the Civil War Cleveland was one of the few men who possessed the resources to avoid Lincoln’s controversial draft order of 1863 by hiring another man to take his place, but also engaged in open deception through a hoax known as the Murchison Letter.
At the end of October, as the election neared, a letter was sent to Lionel Sackville-West, British ambassador to the United States, signed by Charles F. Murchison, who claimed to be a former British subject and now a naturalized American. The Murchison Letter asked for Sackville-West’s views on the coming election, and the ambassador wrote a reply hinting that Britain would gain by Cleveland’s re-election. Murchison was actually a California Republican, named George A. Osgoodby, and the Republicans used the British ambassador’s letter to attack Cleveland, who at once demanded Sackville-West’s recall. But the damage was done and Cleveland lost a good many votes, especially among Irish Americans opposed to a candidate allegedly favorable to Britain.
Cleveland won the popular vote but lost the general election in the Electoral College. His wife said, “They better not move the furniture, we’re coming back four years from today.” Four years later, Cleveland beat Harrison in a landslide.
The first of a 2 part series.
Part 2 will appear in 2 weeks. |