What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

timschochet's thread- Mods, please move this thread to the Politics Subforum, thank you (2 Viewers)

He (Trump) is speaking to his audience who don't understand better. Maybe he doesn't himself either, but he seems to be hitting a lot of complex issues with statements the uninformed will accept and get behind. To me it seems like a well thought out strategy.

However, the best strategies in the world fail when execution fails.
That's not a good answer, because that presumes Trump will be president when that happens.
No one can execute Trumps stated policies, regardless of who is elected.

Scary to think that someone might try

 
He (Trump) is speaking to his audience who don't understand better. Maybe he doesn't himself either, but he seems to be hitting a lot of complex issues with statements the uninformed will accept and get behind. To me it seems like a well thought out strategy.

However, the best strategies in the world fail when execution fails.
That's not a good answer, because that presumes Trump will be president when that happens.
No one can execute Trumps stated policies, regardless of who is elected.

Scary to think that someone might try
Which policies?

Does he have a stated policy besides the couple he has on immigration? The only ones I know are 1. build a wall, 2. deport all the Hispanics who can't whip out their papers on demand, then let the "good ones" back in the "door" that Gandalf Trump has created in the middle of said wall appearing in (1).

Has anyone else replicated this, er, "platform"? I think maybe Cruz of all people (lessee, Cuban immigrant parents, born in Canada) comes closest.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
He (Trump) is speaking to his audience who don't understand better. Maybe he doesn't himself either, but he seems to be hitting a lot of complex issues with statements the uninformed will accept and get behind. To me it seems like a well thought out strategy.

However, the best strategies in the world fail when execution fails.
That's not a good answer, because that presumes Trump will be president when that happens.
No one can execute Trumps stated policies, regardless of who is elected.

Scary to think that someone might try
Which policies?

Does he have a stated policy besides the couple he has on immigration? The only ones I know are 1. build a wall, 2. deport all the Hispanics who can't whip out their papers on demand, then let the "good ones" back in the "door" that Gandalf Trump has created in the middle of said wall appearing in (1).

Has anyone else replicated this, er, "platform"? I think maybe Cruz of all people (lessee, Cuban immigrant parents, born in Canada) comes closest.
Make sure the japanese cars don't come in and take american jobs

Renegotiate with Iran, because he wants to

Oh and spirit the captives/hostages in Iran back to the US before the inauguration, because they know it has to happen

That's what I've seen so far

 
He (Trump) is speaking to his audience who don't understand better. Maybe he doesn't himself either, but he seems to be hitting a lot of complex issues with statements the uninformed will accept and get behind. To me it seems like a well thought out strategy.

However, the best strategies in the world fail when execution fails.
That's not a good answer, because that presumes Trump will be president when that happens.
No one can execute Trumps stated policies, regardless of who is elected.

Scary to think that someone might try
Which policies?

Does he have a stated policy besides the couple he has on immigration? The only ones I know are 1. build a wall, 2. deport all the Hispanics who can't whip out their papers on demand, then let the "good ones" back in the "door" that Gandalf Trump has created in the middle of said wall appearing in (1).

Has anyone else replicated this, er, "platform"? I think maybe Cruz of all people (lessee, Cuban immigrant parents, born in Canada) comes closest.
Make sure the japanese cars don't come in and take american jobs

Renegotiate with Iran, because he wants to

Oh and spirit the captives/hostages in Iran back to the US before the inauguration, because they know it has to happen

That's what I've seen so far
Ha, you're right he has several policies after all. Damnit he's chock full of substance.

 
timschochet said:
Rich Conway said:
timschochet said:
Tim,

Based on your posts in the other thread(s) about opposing tariffs, do you think that switching to a consumption tax like many advocate is also a stealth form of implementing such tariffs?
I hadn't really thought about it. Maybe.I've never believed in a consumption tax, but I've also never given it too much thought because it would require a constitutional amendment to do away with income tax and I don't see that happening.
I don't see why a consumption tax would be a stealth tariff. It would apply equally to domestic and foreign goods, no?Also, no amendment is needed. The 16th says Congress can levy an income tax, not that it has to.
Ive heard both liberal and conservative experts say that it would, so that's what I was going on. I don't know enough to respond to your point.
It is pretty simple. Today a certain percentage of everything you buy - products and services have prices that include paying the seller of those service's taxes. For simplicity just consider the federal taxes. While there is some corporate taxes on US profits that are easy to consider is also that the majority of federal tax revenue is tied to labor (payroll taxes and about two thirds of income taxes) if we took all our current taxes* out of our prices the products that use the most labor would come down in prices the most. If we apply a 30% on everything that is bought by an end consumer to make up the differences the products that have more taxes embedded in them now will go down in price relative to those items that have less tax embedded in them. Or more simply items that include "lots" of American labor and/or profits will be cheaper and those products with little American labor and/or profits will be more expensive.

*Of course taking all of the taxes out of prices means cutting everyone's before taxes pay to their after tax pay which is easier said than done but this only at best has a delaying effect of the concept as over time the effect would be the same.

 
timschochet said:
Rich Conway said:
timschochet said:
Tim,

Based on your posts in the other thread(s) about opposing tariffs, do you think that switching to a consumption tax like many advocate is also a stealth form of implementing such tariffs?
I hadn't really thought about it. Maybe.I've never believed in a consumption tax, but I've also never given it too much thought because it would require a constitutional amendment to do away with income tax and I don't see that happening.
I don't see why a consumption tax would be a stealth tariff. It would apply equally to domestic and foreign goods, no?Also, no amendment is needed. The 16th says Congress can levy an income tax, not that it has to.
Ive heard both liberal and conservative experts say that it would, so that's what I was going on. I don't know enough to respond to your point.
It is pretty simple. Today a certain percentage of everything you buy - products and services have prices that include paying the seller of those service's taxes. For simplicity just consider the federal taxes. While there is some corporate taxes on US profits that are easy to consider is also that the majority of federal tax revenue is tied to labor (payroll taxes and about two thirds of income taxes) if we took all our current taxes* out of our prices the products that use the most labor would come down in prices the most. If we apply a 30% on everything that is bought by an end consumer to make up the differences the products that have more taxes embedded in them now will go down in price relative to those items that have less tax embedded in them. Or more simply items that include "lots" of American labor and/or profits will be cheaper and those products with little American labor and/or profits will be more expensive.

*Of course taking all of the taxes out of prices means cutting everyone's before taxes pay to their after tax pay which is easier said than done but this only at best has a delaying effect of the concept as over time the effect would be the same.
Its supply and demand. Not cost and demand. HTH.

 
dparker713 said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
timschochet said:
Rich Conway said:
timschochet said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Tim,

Based on your posts in the other thread(s) about opposing tariffs, do you think that switching to a consumption tax like many advocate is also a stealth form of implementing such tariffs?
I hadn't really thought about it. Maybe.I've never believed in a consumption tax, but I've also never given it too much thought because it would require a constitutional amendment to do away with income tax and I don't see that happening.
I don't see why a consumption tax would be a stealth tariff. It would apply equally to domestic and foreign goods, no?Also, no amendment is needed. The 16th says Congress can levy an income tax, not that it has to.
Ive heard both liberal and conservative experts say that it would, so that's what I was going on. I don't know enough to respond to your point.
It is pretty simple. Today a certain percentage of everything you buy - products and services have prices that include paying the seller of those service's taxes. For simplicity just consider the federal taxes. While there is some corporate taxes on US profits that are easy to consider is also that the majority of federal tax revenue is tied to labor (payroll taxes and about two thirds of income taxes) if we took all our current taxes* out of our prices the products that use the most labor would come down in prices the most. If we apply a 30% on everything that is bought by an end consumer to make up the differences the products that have more taxes embedded in them now will go down in price relative to those items that have less tax embedded in them. Or more simply items that include "lots" of American labor and/or profits will be cheaper and those products with little American labor and/or profits will be more expensive.

*Of course taking all of the taxes out of prices means cutting everyone's before taxes pay to their after tax pay which is easier said than done but this only at best has a delaying effect of the concept as over time the effect would be the same.
Its supply and demand. Not cost and demand. HTH.
And that changes what?

 
George Will's latest assault on Donald Trump (here:https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-a-malleable-mess/2015/09/09/05873b94-5652-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html)contains an interesting passage with regard to trade, which is relevant to the discussion we've been having in the Hillary thread and this one over the last few days:

Trump cited, as evidence that “our country is being killed on trade,” this: “They have in Japan the biggest ships you’ve ever seen pouring cars into Los Angeles, pouring them in. I’ve never seen anything like it. We send them beef, and they don’t even want it. It’s going to end, and they’re going to like us.”

Well. Leaving aside Japan’s strange willingness to purchase unwanted beef, most Japanese vehicles that pour into the United States do so from plants in the United States. The vehicles are assembled by Americans using mostly American parts.

...South Carolinians can evaluate his America-can’t-compete, trade-is-killing-us campaign. There, his woe-is-us narrative will collide with cheerful realities that Republican Gov. Nikki Haley recently described in a Washington speech:

Flat-screen TVs are made in Winnsboro, bicycles are made in Manning (the New Jersey company moved its manufacturing there from China), and five foreign-owned tire companies (Michelin, Bridgestone, Continental, Giti Tire and Trelleborg) manufacture in the state. So do Mercedes and, starting in 2018, Volvo. South Carolina has what Germany does not have — the world’s largest BMW plant, from which vehicles pour at a rate of one every minute.

Thoughts?
The only reason these cars are assembled in the USA (not produced, but put together like jigsaw pieces from parts made in other countries) is because of the tariffs you rail against.

We impose a much stiffer duty to import a fully assembled car than we do to import the component parts.

 
George Will's latest assault on Donald Trump (here:https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-a-malleable-mess/2015/09/09/05873b94-5652-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html)contains an interesting passage with regard to trade, which is relevant to the discussion we've been having in the Hillary thread and this one over the last few days:

Trump cited, as evidence that “our country is being killed on trade,” this: “They have in Japan the biggest ships you’ve ever seen pouring cars into Los Angeles, pouring them in. I’ve never seen anything like it. We send them beef, and they don’t even want it. It’s going to end, and they’re going to like us.”

Well. Leaving aside Japan’s strange willingness to purchase unwanted beef, most Japanese vehicles that pour into the United States do so from plants in the United States. The vehicles are assembled by Americans using mostly American parts.

...South Carolinians can evaluate his America-can’t-compete, trade-is-killing-us campaign. There, his woe-is-us narrative will collide with cheerful realities that Republican Gov. Nikki Haley recently described in a Washington speech:

Flat-screen TVs are made in Winnsboro, bicycles are made in Manning (the New Jersey company moved its manufacturing there from China), and five foreign-owned tire companies (Michelin, Bridgestone, Continental, Giti Tire and Trelleborg) manufacture in the state. So do Mercedes and, starting in 2018, Volvo. South Carolina has what Germany does not have — the world’s largest BMW plant, from which vehicles pour at a rate of one every minute.

Thoughts?
The only reason these cars are assembled in the USA (not produced, but put together like jigsaw pieces from parts made in other countries) is because of the tariffs you rail against.

We impose a much stiffer duty to import a fully assembled car than we do to import the component parts.
I don't think this is true. Many of these "foreign" cars have a higher percentage of domestically produced parts (including engines and transmissions) than some of our "domestic" brands.

 
56. Sitting Bull

I wish it to be remembered that I was the last man of my tribe to surrender my rifle.

Also known as Lakota, Sitting Bull was a Sioux chieftain and holy man who led his tribe to victory in the Battle of Little Big Horn against George Armstrong Custer. From that victory he became perhaps the most well known native American in history. His goal in life was to maintain the integrity of his tribe and the independence of American Indians on the western plains. This was a doomed effort, and Sitting Bull died a famous failure, but a noble one.

Sitting Bull was, especially later in life, a capitalist and an opportunist. He befriended Annie Oakley, joined the Buffalo Bill Wild West Show, and in true American fashion, earned a small fortune by selling his picture and signature as a celebrity. He was killed by Indian agents who were afraid that, during the Ghost Dance rebellion that led to the massacre at Wounded Knee, Sitting Bull would become a powerful voice that would further inspire the rebels.

My selection of Sitting Bull is somewhat like my selection of John Wooden in that not only was he himself a great and notable American, he is also representative of a number of great native Americans. I actually considered several of these for this list, especially Crazy Horse, Geronimo, and Tecumsah. But Sitting Bull was finally the one I chose, both for his victory against Custer (which is the most significant native American victory in their tragic struggle against white expansion) but also because he was such an American figure, a forerunner of the modern celebrity who used his fame to sell himself. (His great enemy, Custer, was also a self-promoter of great skill).

Up next- The father of the most significant American genre of music...

 
Yankee your work is fascinating. I haven't commented on the 19th century because it's not my area of expertise. As you discuss the 20th century, especially the elections from 1948 to the present day, I plan on offering some input since I have managed to study a lot of those in some detail.

 
The Electoral College Part 4

1860

The election of 1860 changed the nation - and not just because we got Abraham Lincoln in office. It changed the nature of the major parties in the country pretty much once and for all. With shots fired in the Civil War and the country spiraling into chaos the Democrats and Republicans needed to get their man in the White House so that they could direct the nature of the battle. The Democrats were split almost immediately. Coming off of his debates with Abraham Lincoln, Stephen Douglas was hated by the democrats in the deep south. The split fractured the party when it came time to nominate a candidate. As a result, the Democrats nominated Stephen Douglas but the deep south bolted the convention and nominated their own person, John Breckinridge. The republican convention, on the other hand, was even worse with names that wwere capable of leading the nation. The two primary contenders were Lincoln and Seward and Seward led on the first ballot but not by enough to take the nomination. By the third ballot Lincoln would take the nomination.

However, former old guard Whigs who did not support the radical anti-slavery ideals of the Republican Party formed their party instead of supporting Abraham Lincoln. That party, the Constitutional Union party nominated John Bell for President. It would be a 4-headed race. And because the democrats were split, the result is now seen as a formality. The republicans didn't even run in the southern states and Lincoln wasn't even on the ballot in those states for someone to vote for. But it didn't matter. Lincoln took the entire north and California and with it 40% of the vote and 180 electors. The deep south led by Breckenridge took all the deep south states, 18% of the vote and 72 electors. Stephen Douglas only managed to win the state of Missouri and with it 12 electors but because of the way the ballots were all over the place he ended up with 30% of the popular vote. Finally, Bell and his party won support on the border states and Virginia taking 39 electors. Lincoln would be President and the war would be fought.
We should talk more about this one. I covered it at length back in the Civil War thread, but it's easily for me the most fascinating election in American history. So many subplots, so many interesting what-ifs. For instance:

1. John Brown plays a major part here. If not for his ill-timed insurrection, southern unionists like Andrew Stephens would likely have won out and managed to steer the Charleston convention toward Stephen Douglas. After John Brown, too many southerners turned to the fire-eaters. So suppose Douglas had united the Democrats?

2. Seward's managers were inept and could not compete with Lincoln's men in terms of making promises (such as the one to Cameron, which locked up Lincoln's nomination. Suppose they hadn't been inept, and Seward had won the nomination? Suppose Seward had been elected President? How would American history had changed?

3. Robert Toombs of Georgia took the leadership of the fire-eaters and was assumed to be the most viable candidate to be the new Confederate President. But at the Democratic convention he got drunk and this made other delegates cautious, so by the time they met again in Montgomery, they had decided to reject Toombs and select Jeff Davis. Suppose Toombs had controlled himself in Charleston and been chosen as President of the Confederacy?

And so forth. Lots of could have beens here...

 
The Electoral College Part 4

1864

The fact that we actually had an election in 1864 in the midst of civil war is amazing. But with the civil war being fought, the results of the election were never going to be in doubt. The southern states in rebellion did not take part in the election. Lincoln was obviously chosen to run again, and the reamining democrats in the states nominated George McClellan. Lincoln won 212-21 in the college and got 51% of the popular vote - but again, there were no southern states that took part in the election. But again - the fact that the election took place was remarkable. The next few elections would have a different country to navigate through.
You should mention that the key to this election was the fortuitous fall of Atlanta just a few weeks before the vote. Robert E. Lee believed to the end of his life that IF Atlanta had managed to hold firm for just a few weeks longer, that this combined with the stalemate in the west between Lee and Grant would have resulted in a victory for McClellan, which might have meant a negotiated peace between North and South. Davis' removal of Joseph Johnston, therefore, a defensive minded commander, and replacement with John Bell Hood (overly aggressive) was the fatal error.

Now there are problems with this theory, mainly that even the most extreme Copperheads in the North, while eager for a negotiated end to the war, were not willing to concede independence for the Confederacy. And since McClellan was only a moderate Copperhead, one wonders what exactly the result of such a negotiation would have been. But many historians believe this doesn't matter, because once the war was halted for negotiations, it would not have resumed, and the South would have won independence in practical terms. This was what many people, including Lord Russell of the British Empire, believed would happen at the time. The other problem is: would Atlanta failing to surrender truly have resulted in a victory for McClellan? We'll never know.

The other fascinating thing about this election is that Lincoln, running with Andrew Johnson (a Democrat) did not run as a Republican, but instead for the Union Party, which won it's only election.

 
George Will's latest assault on Donald Trump (here:https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-a-malleable-mess/2015/09/09/05873b94-5652-11e5-8bb1-b488d231bba2_story.html)contains an interesting passage with regard to trade, which is relevant to the discussion we've been having in the Hillary thread and this one over the last few days:

Trump cited, as evidence that “our country is being killed on trade,” this: “They have in Japan the biggest ships you’ve ever seen pouring cars into Los Angeles, pouring them in. I’ve never seen anything like it. We send them beef, and they don’t even want it. It’s going to end, and they’re going to like us.”

Well. Leaving aside Japan’s strange willingness to purchase unwanted beef, most Japanese vehicles that pour into the United States do so from plants in the United States. The vehicles are assembled by Americans using mostly American parts.

...South Carolinians can evaluate his America-can’t-compete, trade-is-killing-us campaign. There, his woe-is-us narrative will collide with cheerful realities that Republican Gov. Nikki Haley recently described in a Washington speech:

Flat-screen TVs are made in Winnsboro, bicycles are made in Manning (the New Jersey company moved its manufacturing there from China), and five foreign-owned tire companies (Michelin, Bridgestone, Continental, Giti Tire and Trelleborg) manufacture in the state. So do Mercedes and, starting in 2018, Volvo. South Carolina has what Germany does not have — the world’s largest BMW plant, from which vehicles pour at a rate of one every minute.

Thoughts?
The only reason these cars are assembled in the USA (not produced, but put together like jigsaw pieces from parts made in other countries) is because of the tariffs you rail against.

We impose a much stiffer duty to import a fully assembled car than we do to import the component parts.
Not to mention the massive subsidies that states like SC have been doling out.

 
Yankee your work is fascinating. I haven't commented on the 19th century because it's not my area of expertise. As you discuss the 20th century, especially the elections from 1948 to the present day, I plan on offering some input since I have managed to study a lot of those in some detail.
I'm trying not to go too far down all the rabbit holes because I'd never get done with this but your following posts are all part of the overall story, yes.

 
56. Sitting Bull

I wish it to be remembered that I was the last man of my tribe to surrender my rifle.

Also known as Lakota, Sitting Bull was a Sioux chieftain and holy man who led his tribe to victory in the Battle of Little Big Horn against George Armstrong Custer. From that victory he became perhaps the most well known native American in history. His goal in life was to maintain the integrity of his tribe and the independence of American Indians on the western plains. This was a doomed effort, and Sitting Bull died a famous failure, but a noble one.

Sitting Bull was, especially later in life, a capitalist and an opportunist. He befriended Annie Oakley, joined the Buffalo Bill Wild West Show, and in true American fashion, earned a small fortune by selling his picture and signature as a celebrity. He was killed by Indian agents who were afraid that, during the Ghost Dance rebellion that led to the massacre at Wounded Knee, Sitting Bull would become a powerful voice that would further inspire the rebels.

My selection of Sitting Bull is somewhat like my selection of John Wooden in that not only was he himself a great and notable American, he is also representative of a number of great native Americans. I actually considered several of these for this list, especially Crazy Horse, Geronimo, and Tecumsah. But Sitting Bull was finally the one I chose, both for his victory against Custer (which is the most significant native American victory in their tragic struggle against white expansion) but also because he was such an American figure, a forerunner of the modern celebrity who used his fame to sell himself. (His great enemy, Custer, was also a self-promoter of great skill).

Up next- The father of the most significant American genre of music...
Chief Joseph should have made the short list. I'd probably put him above the rest.

 
We should talk more about this one. I covered it at length back in the Civil War thread, but it's easily for me the most fascinating election in American history. So many subplots, so many interesting what-ifs. For instance:

1. John Brown plays a major part here. If not for his ill-timed insurrection, southern unionists like Andrew Stephens would likely have won out and managed to steer the Charleston convention toward Stephen Douglas. After John Brown, too many southerners turned to the fire-eaters. So suppose Douglas had united the Democrats?

2. Seward's managers were inept and could not compete with Lincoln's men in terms of making promises (such as the one to Cameron, which locked up Lincoln's nomination. Suppose they hadn't been inept, and Seward had won the nomination? Suppose Seward had been elected President? How would American history had changed?

3. Robert Toombs of Georgia took the leadership of the fire-eaters and was assumed to be the most viable candidate to be the new Confederate President. But at the Democratic convention he got drunk and this made other delegates cautious, so by the time they met again in Montgomery, they had decided to reject Toombs and select Jeff Davis. Suppose Toombs had controlled himself in Charleston and been chosen as President of the Confederacy?

And so forth. Lots of could have beens here...
1. If The Democrats united under Douglas they would have won the election. The signed their own death warrants by splitting the party.

2. We have history behind us, but Seward likely wouldn't have been a very effective executive - he was much better suited talent wise for the cabinet. But you also have the possibility of a third candidate ending up with the nomination if Seward and Lincoln couldn't get over the top. Salmon Chase and Edward Bates were considered contenders too. Their problems, like Seward's, was that they weren't universally liked within the party itself. But assume Seward got the nomination - there is every indication that he wouldn't have carried the western votes the way Lincoln did. Even with the fractured democrats you could argue that Breckinridge could have pulled it off. The votes in New York and New Jersey specifically could have fallen away from the republicans, especially in North Jersey and Eastern New York. And if the Democrats were united against Seward, given Sewards weaknesses in his own party they probably easily defeat him.

The election is interesting for the fact that the south lost more than Lincoln won. Had they kept the party together with the understanding that it was only to keep a Democrat in the White House, they would have done it. South Carolina was already in a state of civil war, but the rest of the deep south wasn't. It's certainly possible that if Seward were the nominee the Civil War itself is a very different, and perhaps even less bloody affair - and the United States might not be what it is today.

3. Toombs might not have fought the war like Davis. As part of Davis' cabinet he was the only one that was against the attack on Fort Sumter. So you could argue he might have been more diplomatic in the conflict - or he could have failed to lead a unified confederacy and it would have been unable to fight a collective fight. Who knows.

 
55. Louis Armstrong

There are two kinds of music, the good and the bad. I play the good kind.

Louis Armstrong is the most pivotal, most influential figure in all of American jazz music, which arguably is the most singular American musical form (more on that later). Jazz purists are going to prefer Miles Davis or John Coltrane or Charlie Parker or Duke Ellington, but without Armstrong, these guys don't exist. Armstrong was so foundational that it might be said he invented the form, or at least was the first to truly popularize it.

Though Armstrong began in New Orleans (which is the city most associated with traditional jazz), it was in Chicago in the 1920s when Louie and his "Hot Five" first rose to fame. In those early days it was his phenomenal trumpet playing that changed popular music forever. It was only later that Armstrong became just as well known to the American public for his personality, his gravely voice, and his scat singing.

I had no problem at all putting Satchmo on this list; he's an obvious choice. The problem I had is where to put him. I have already ranked two other musicians, George Gershwin (who I regard as America's greatest composer) and Madonna (one of our greatest superstar performers). I considered three other jazz greats along with Armstrong: Benny Goodman, (who delivered jazz to a wilder audience), Duke Ellington (only slightly behind Gershwin as a composer), and Miles Davis (considered to be Jazz's greatest innovator.) But I couldn't quite find room for any of them on this list, though that might be a mistake on my part. I also considered Irving Berlin, Stephen Foster, and Cole Porter. Of all the ones mentioned here, Porter came the closest to making this list, and probably should have.

There are 4 remaining musicians on my list, all ranked above Louis Armstrong. Three of them, like Madonna, are superstar performers, but their fame outweighed even hers and their cultural influence either matched or outweighed Louis Armstrong. One of them, slightly less famous than the other 3, was also a composer who should be considered ultimately our greatest American musician (I'll make that argument when his time comes around.)

This leads to the question of whether or not American popular standard music (see Cole Porter, Berlin, Gershwin) or rock and roll (see 3 of the 4 musicians coming later on) should be held as an equal to jazz in terms of American music. I'm not expert enough to make that determination.

Up next: The most important criminal in American history...

 
dparker713 said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
timschochet said:
Rich Conway said:
timschochet said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Tim,

Based on your posts in the other thread(s) about opposing tariffs, do you think that switching to a consumption tax like many advocate is also a stealth form of implementing such tariffs?
I hadn't really thought about it. Maybe.I've never believed in a consumption tax, but I've also never given it too much thought because it would require a constitutional amendment to do away with income tax and I don't see that happening.
I don't see why a consumption tax would be a stealth tariff. It would apply equally to domestic and foreign goods, no?Also, no amendment is needed. The 16th says Congress can levy an income tax, not that it has to.
Ive heard both liberal and conservative experts say that it would, so that's what I was going on. I don't know enough to respond to your point.
It is pretty simple. Today a certain percentage of everything you buy - products and services have prices that include paying the seller of those service's taxes. For simplicity just consider the federal taxes. While there is some corporate taxes on US profits that are easy to consider is also that the majority of federal tax revenue is tied to labor (payroll taxes and about two thirds of income taxes) if we took all our current taxes* out of our prices the products that use the most labor would come down in prices the most. If we apply a 30% on everything that is bought by an end consumer to make up the differences the products that have more taxes embedded in them now will go down in price relative to those items that have less tax embedded in them. Or more simply items that include "lots" of American labor and/or profits will be cheaper and those products with little American labor and/or profits will be more expensive.

*Of course taking all of the taxes out of prices means cutting everyone's before taxes pay to their after tax pay which is easier said than done but this only at best has a delaying effect of the concept as over time the effect would be the same.
Its supply and demand. Not cost and demand. HTH.
And that changes what?
Prices are not directly tied to production costs. Its the same fallacy behind trickle down economics.

 
dparker713 said:
Tim,

Based on your posts in the other thread(s) about opposing tariffs, do you think that switching to a consumption tax like many advocate is also a stealth form of implementing such tariffs?
I hadn't really thought about it. Maybe.I've never believed in a consumption tax, but I've also never given it too much thought because it would require a constitutional amendment to do away with income tax and I don't see that happening.
I don't see why a consumption tax would be a stealth tariff. It would apply equally to domestic and foreign goods, no?Also, no amendment is needed. The 16th says Congress can levy an income tax, not that it has to.
Ive heard both liberal and conservative experts say that it would, so that's what I was going on. I don't know enough to respond to your point.
It is pretty simple. Today a certain percentage of everything you buy - products and services have prices that include paying the seller of those service's taxes. For simplicity just consider the federal taxes. While there is some corporate taxes on US profits that are easy to consider is also that the majority of federal tax revenue is tied to labor (payroll taxes and about two thirds of income taxes) if we took all our current taxes* out of our prices the products that use the most labor would come down in prices the most. If we apply a 30% on everything that is bought by an end consumer to make up the differences the products that have more taxes embedded in them now will go down in price relative to those items that have less tax embedded in them. Or more simply items that include "lots" of American labor and/or profits will be cheaper and those products with little American labor and/or profits will be more expensive.

*Of course taking all of the taxes out of prices means cutting everyone's before taxes pay to their after tax pay which is easier said than done but this only at best has a delaying effect of the concept as over time the effect would be the same.
Its supply and demand. Not cost and demand. HTH.
And that changes what?
Prices are not directly tied to production costs. Its the same fallacy behind trickle down economics.
Of course not.

 
This leads to the question of whether or not American popular standard music (see Cole Porter, Berlin, Gershwin) or rock and roll (see 3 of the 4 musicians coming later on) should be held as an equal to jazz in terms of American music. I'm not expert enough to make that determination.
You're asking the wrong question. And you're falling into the genre trap.

 
Electoral College continued.....

1896

William McKinely had no rival in the republican party for the nomination. He took it on the first ballot with only courtesy votes for a few other people. The Democrats nonimnated William Jennings Bryan. Bryan was nationally known for his Cross of Gold speech attacking the American economy. The Populist party having their most important platofrm issue taken by the Democrats sought to join the democrats and nominated Bryan as well. The republican position on gold and silver was going to cost them the deep south and the west. But to counter that the GOP spent an ungodly at the time $5 million on the campaign. McKinley campaigned from his house, giving over 300 speeches from his front porch, while Bryan toured the nation attacking the gold standard. Bryan attacked the GOP as the party of big business and slaves to the gold standard to keep the lower classes and farmers in chains to the money interests in manufacturing. But Bryan went too far against the gold standard and in the middle of the campaign, a large section of Democrats that actually supported the gold standard bolted the party. It cost Bryan the election.

In the final results, McKinely only won by 600,000 total votes. McKinley took the northeast and the Ohio valley along with the far west, while Bryan got the entire south and the midwest. The 271 to 176 electoral victory for McKinley began a 30 year history of the GOP controling the White House only interrupted by the GOP party split that gave Woodrow Wilson the office in 1912.

1900

After winning the Spanish American war and guiding the economy to a time of growth, McKinley was easily renominated. The Democrats again chose Bryan to run against him. Bryan stuck to his anti-gold platform but in the intervening years the gold rush in Alaska boosted the economy and the western farmers were seeing profits rise with more gold in the system. Without the support of the midwest, Bryan had little chance to beat McKinley. McKinley took the entire northeast again as well as the far west again and this time he took most of the midwest states. Bryan kept the south but it wouldn't be enough and he lost in the college 292 to 155.

1904

After taking the top seat when McKinley was assassinated, Theodore Roosevelt began his ultimate ascendency to the pantheon of American leaders. By the time of the GOP convention for the election he was the unchalleneged leader of the party and took the nomination on the first ballot. The Democrats didn't have a national leader by this time and the convention nominated Judge Alton Parker to run against Roosevelt. The election was never truly in doubt. Parker was picked because he was a more conservative Democrat and the party hoped that the populist wing of the party would vote for him just to get the White House, but they didn't. Teddy destroyed him in the election 336-140 in the college taking the entire northeast, the entire Ohio valley, the entire midwest and the entire pacific coast. The southern wing of the Democratic party stayed together as they had been for most of the previous 7 elections and gave Parker the south. But it wasn't nearly enough. The popular vote went 57 to 37 for Teddy, which in any era is a landslide.

1908

Roosevelt promised to not run again, which he regretted for the rest of his life. He would have won without too much fanfare. Instead he chose his successor in William Howard Taft. But at the convention there was a alrge movement to make Teddy run again. At the last minute, Roosevelt sent word to the convention that he would not run and asked them to support Taft. And so they did on the first ballot. Meanwhile, the democrats were still a mess in a national sense. The failure of the conservative wing of the party to win the last election empowerd the populist wing to control the convention where they once again nominated their champion, William Jennings Bryan.

Taft barely ran. Roosevelt ran for him while Taft played golf. Taft promised to keep Teddy's policies and plans and with it he destroyed Bryan in the election. Bryan again took the solid south but only 3 of the midwestern states while Taft took everything else. The final electoral college stood at 321 to 162 - a bigger result than Teddy ever got.

1912

But by 1912, Taft destroyed his own party. Breaking from Roosevelt he lost his closest and most powerful ally in government. Taft and Roosevelt went to war against each other openly fracturing the party. With more and more states creating primary elections, the voice of the people in the actual nomination was now becoming a powerful force. By the time of the convention, the states that had primaries made it clear - Roosevelt still was supported by the people because he won all but 1 of those primaries. As the delegates sat at he convention, Roosevelt already had 271 delegates locked in which was just 80 short of getting the nomination. Taft only had 70 in his corner. It looked like Teddy was going to grab the nomination. But Taft used the power of his office to start buying votes. At the same time, as the party leader, Taft controlled the republican committee who reviewed and accepted the credentials of the delegates. Since the committee was full of Taft loyalists, they began a three day internal struggle to approve only those delegates that were pro- Taft. It worked. Taft took the nomination with the overwhelming majority of the votes at the convention. Teddy took a couple hundred still. But that was only the beginning of the problem for republicans.

After losing the nomination because of the Taft loyalists, Roosevelt and his supporters bolted the party and formed their own, the Progressive Party. Roosevelt was not going to let Taft get re-elected. And the split spelled the doom of the GOP. Teddy ran a furious campaign, even giving a speech minutes after being shot in the chest by a would be assassin. Taft continued to play golf. The Democrats saw the opportunity and nominted Woodrow Wilson with a platform of sweeping change int he country. Taft's supporters had to run against two progressive candidates and as a result they became more conservative which only broke the party more. Meanwhile, Wilson wasn't a perfect candidate for the Democrats. There were no less than 14 guys vying for the nomination for the party. Wilson wasn't the leader on the first ballot, nor the 15th. But with internal deals being made and the party trying to get itself one leader to go after a fractured party, the settled on Wilson.

Roosevelt and Taft gave Wilson the White House. The two republicans took over a million more votes that Wilson did combined. But their split cost them both. In the final tally Taft got 23% of the popular vote, only 8 electors and only won two states. Roosevelt grabbed 6 states, 27% of the vote and 88 electors. Wilson received fewer votes than Bryan did in each of the elections that Bryan lost, but the split in GOP gave him a win with only 43% of the popular vote but that trasnslated to 435 electoral votes and a landslide win. Wilson would be the first Democrat in the White House in decades and the only one until Franklin Roosevelt beat Hoover 25 years later.

1916

Wilson was easily renominated on the first ballot. On the GOP side, Teddy Roosevelt believed that the last election would result in him grabbing the nomination this time. But he didn't take into account the hatred that many in the party had for him now because his break from the party and Taft gave the White House to Wilson. It was made clear to Roosevelt before the convention even started that he was not only not going to get the nomination but that he wasn't welcome there to begin with. Instead, the GOP was once again united and selected Charles Evans Hughes as their candidate, a justice whom President Taft had appointed to the bench. Leaving the conventions it was assumed that Hughes would be able to beat Wilson now that the GOP Was united and the public was starting to grow tired of the progrssive agenda of the democrats.

Hughes cost himself the election in hindsight. He refused to support labor leaders in California during the election and as a result they unified behind Wilson. Most of the German American population in the west refused to vote for the GOP due to Teddy Roosevelt's attack on their homeland and desired position that America enter World War I. Had Hughes been able to secure these two sectors, he would have won the election. He went to bed the night of the election being told by party leaders that he was going to win. The next day it still looked that way as votes from California were late getting in and Ohio was very very close. Two days later when Ohio and California reported, they gave their states to Wilson, and with it the election. Wilson took the entire south again,along with the entire midwest and Ohio. Hughes kept the Northeast but didn't make any progress in the west. The popular vote was only separated by 3 points, but Wilson took the college 277 to 254. The GOP could have won if not for California labor leaders moving to Wilson. They would learn their lesson 4 years later.

1920

No one expected Warren Harding to grab the GOP nomination at first. He wasn't the top of the party but he did have the most powerful supporter in the convention, Ohio lawyer Harry Dougherty, the most powerful republican lobbyist in the party. With no one taking the nomination of hte first ballot, Dougherty began working behind the scenes and ultimate got Harding the nomination on the 4th ballot. When the party also selected Calvin Coolidge to be his Vice President, the party power players got the men they wanted in the top spots.

For the democrats, unity was a problem. Liberal Ohio business leader James Cox was the main choice, but much of the party supported Franklin Roosevelt. After 44 ballots with the leader all over the place, the deomcrats finally united behind Cox and named Franklin as the VP. Harding ran from his front porch while Cox toured the nation. Al Jolsen wrote songs in support of Harding and stumped for him continuously. With the handling of the war and the League of Nations dominating much of the campaign along with Wilson's massive social plans, the people pulled back from progressivism and elected Harding in a landslide. Harding took 60% of the popular vote and 404 electors wining every state except the solid south. Cox even lost Tennessee. It was a repudiation of the Wilson agenda and the progressive movements in the nation.

1924

Coolidge had taken over for Harding after the latter died and was easily renominated by the GOP. The only true threat to Coolidge at the convention was Henry Ford, but Coolidge used the power of his office perfectly and basically took out any contender before the convention even started. The drama of this election was all on the Democratic convention. The 1924 Democratic Convention is still a contender for the worst most damaging political convention in our history. The renewed energy and power of the KKK in the south and west overshadowed the convention with pro and anti-Klan groups attacking each other continually. At the same time, pro and anti-Catholic groups battled each other during the convention as well. Delegates to the convention in New York that were pro-Klan actually joined hooded Klansman in New Jersey and held a rally where they burned crosses.

In the midst of the chaos where there was actual physical violence and protests, the party was trying to choose between California's William McAdoo and New York's Alfred Smith. The most popular person at the convention though was Franklin Roosevelt who wasn't even a candidate. After 75 ballots, the Smith and McAdoo forces had gotten rid of pretty much every other contender except West Virginia's John Davis, one of the better diplomats in American history and to this day one of the more prolific lawyers who argued before the United States Supreme Court. By the 100th ballot, the party was destroying itself and the violence and Klan rallies were damaging everyone at the convention. Nationally the party was becoming a joke. On the 102nd ballot, McAdoo and Smith both lost a huge chunk of their support with electors tiring of both men and choosing Davis as the only other one left standing. Seeing the forest for the trees, Smith's supporters informed him that they were going to back Davis, and when McAdoos supporters found out they did the same. On the 103rd ballot Davis, the ultimate darkhorse candidate akin to James Polk a century earlier, took the nomination. The party was destroyed by the convention. The population considered them a joke and Davis was almost immediately considered a sacrifical lamb.

Socialists and other left wing members of the party bolted and nominated Robert LaFolliette under the banner of the Progressive Party, but it didn't matter. The deep south stayed with the party on election day and votes for Smith giving him 126 electors and 25% of the popular vote. LaFolliet actually won Wisconsin and its 13 electors, but he also grabbed over 16% of the popular vote. Coolidge stormed to victory with 382 electors and 56% of the popular vote. The democratic party was going to need something big to happen to give the public the ability to think of them as a national party again.

1928

Herbert Hoover was the front runner and with little opposition took the nomination on the first ballot for the GOP. The Democrats, not wanting the 1924 convention to happen all over again, unitied immediately behind Alfred Smith of New York. As a catholic, Smith was attacked immediately as a puppet of the Pope. The anti-catholic rhetoric of the election was grotesque and would look like a horror movie in this day and age. Hoover meanwhile ran a safe campaign promising a continuation of Coolidge's economy which was booming. And while the democrats unified to nominate Smith, the party wasn't unified at all on the ground level. And it showed at the ballot box. Hoover took 60% of the popular vote, 444 electors, and won the entire northeast, Ohio Valley, mid west and pacific coast and even took Virginia, North Carolina, Florida and Texas. Smith barely won Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina totaliing 87 electors. It would still take something truly monumental for the Democrats to be a national party again.

1932

And they got it. The Great Depression destroyed Herbert Hoover. The Bonus Army incident didn't help either. With the economy destroyed and millions out of work, the GOP was seen as the problem and the people revolted against them. The GOP convention nominated Hoover on the first ballot but there was no energy and no firebrand speeches. They were convinced that they were going to lose. The Democrats finally sensing an opportunity to get the White House again Several names were on the top of everyone's minds but the biggest was Franklin Roosevelt. Recovering from polio and being paralyzed there were many that felt he couldn't do the job or be seen as Presidential. But his political machine was brilliant and he took the nomination on the 4th ballot. Breaking with tradition and because it was politically necessary to show a personal power Roosevelt became the first presidential candidate to address his party's convention personally and accept the nomination. With the depression laying at Hoover's feet, FDR ran a very steady and smart campaign to make sure he kept that anger at the forefront and the people focused on Hoover's failure and not any problems on the Democrat side.

It worked. FDR obliterated Hoover. Hoover only managed to win Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maine, Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire. Roosevelt tood every other state, 472 electors, and 58% of the popular vote. His promised new deal with the American people resonated and began a 12 year trek for Roosevelt that would see the world plunge itself into ultimate and total war.

1936

Coming up to his re-election, FDR wasn't without problems. The business community broke with him over the Wagner Act and Social Security. But the GOP had no one that could stand up to him. They reluctantly nominted Alfred Landon hoping that he could steal the midwest from FDR. But he was an awful public speaker and no powerful air about him. His message and the entirety of the GOP message was simply drowned out by FDR's coalition of supports from all over the country. By election day, the only thing up in the air was how much FDR was going to win by. And the result was even more than when he beat Hoover. FDR took every state except Maine and Vermont, took 532 electoral votes and 61% of the popular vote. The landslide told FDR that his New Deal was supported and his fight for the little guy was politically popular while at the same time the people still blamed business leaders and the GOP for the depression. Still, the economy wasn't getting much better and FDR was going to need something else to finish his second term and keep the democrats in power in 1940 because obviously, he couldn't run again.

1940

Or so, everyone thought. As the time of the convention drew close, there were rumblings that FDR would run again. Many in the democratic party were not happy. FDR eventually made it known that if Europe kept getting worse and the party wanted him he would run again. Europe got much worse and the party did just that even with some objections from within most notably from his own Vice President who FDR simply replaced as a result. The deep south also objected to FDR selecting Henry Wallace as his new VP. Again though, while the entire party wasn't happy, the GOP didn't have anything to fight it. The GOP nominated Wendel Wilkie who was a Democrat who supported the New Deal. As the election drew closer Wilkie started to make some gains telling the people that if FDR was elected again he would take us to war. FDR had to counter that he would never enter the war. The final month of the campaign was simply one attack after another by the leaders and their party against each other. FDR was parodied as a king, Wilkie as a businessman who would step on the people, FDR as a war monger and Wilkie as an incompetent.

FDR won 449 electoral votes and 55% of the popular vote but for the first time lost some of the midwest to the GOP. Though Wilkie only grabbed 10 states and 82 electoral votes it was the first time in a decade that any state outside of the northeast voted GOP.

1944

In the midst of WWII the democratic party wasn't about to change its nominee and FDR let them know that he would serve again to kept America's plans in place without a change in office. There was no serious opposition to him at this point and he won on the first ballot almost unanimously. The problem was with this VP. Wallace was too liberal for the deep south and so to make sure the party stayed together in an unprecedented election during the war, the party bosses selected, with FDR's approval, Harry Truman. The GOP nominated Thomas Dewey of New York, another moderate republican who supported much of the domestic new deal. His basic platform wasn't to attack FDR's policies but to say he could make them run better. With the war raging the democratic platform was simply to tell people not to change horses in the middle of the race. Not making any traction coming up to the election, Dewey started attacking FDR's age and it worked. He painted FDR as a tired old man who didn't have the energy to run the country anymore. In direct answer to that, FDR began campaigning in earnest showing an energy few thought he had even though he was getting sicker and sicker. When the polls closed, FDR won easily, 432-99 in the college taking 56% of the popular vote. Dewey kept the states that Wilkie won and added Ohio but it simply wasn't enough.

The last two reviews of the electoral college will see the Cold War, Vietnam, recession, social upheaval, and the advancement of the reach and power of the media change american politics and the men and women who would run for the office.

 
Almost Done with the Electoral College......

1948

Harry Truman had a fight on his hands. Within the Democratic Party, many felt that he was a weak candidate whose low approval ratings would give the republicans the White House for the first time in what seemed like forever. Internal players began making overtures to General Dwight Eisenhower whom the party believed was a Democrat. It was not until the eve of the convention when Eisenhower made it clear that he wasn't a democrat, but Truman wasn't out of the woods yet. Truman's former SecCommerce, Henry Wallace - who was also Vice President under FDR - declared that he was going to run with the Progressive Party. Truman's left flank was going to be a problem. The southen wing of his party also was growing restless. Truman tried to balance his projected policy on civil rights in order to appease them enough to keep their votes in line. But with the leadership of Senator Hubert Humphry pro-civil rights democrats forced their agenda into the Democratic Party platform. Truman hoped he would still be able to keep the south in the party but he couldn't. Mississippi's delagation and most of Alabama's stormed out after the plank was voted in. They eventually would form their own party - the States Rights Party - and nominate Governor Strom Thurmond as their candidate for President. With the far left leaving the party and the deep south not there, Truman won the nomination fairly easily.

For the GOP, New York Governor Thomas Dewey was again called into service. He was the most successful opponent in the face of FDR and the GOP felt he could grow that base to achieve victory. As his running mate they chose the future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Earl Warren. Truman immediately attacked the GOP by calling the Congress into session to prove to the people that they were a do-nothing Congress. He set forth a large legislative agenda that he knew the GOP would never pass, but he wanted the do-nothing story to lead the news. Truman then took to the campaign traveling the country giving speeches at every stop, meeting with voters personally. Dewey on the other hand was never a good publi speaker and because of that there was little fire in his campaign. Still, by mid October, polls said that Dewey was going to win by 5 or 6 points.

As voters took to the polls many thought Dewey would win as Truman was seen as unable to get over the unpopular ratings he had. But the polls didn't take into account Truman's campaign and how he connected with the average voter when he would talk to them. We've all seen the newspaper photo with Truman holding a headline that said Dewey defeats Truman so we know the result. Truman received 49.5% of the popular vote to Dewey's 45.1%. It was a 303-189 win the college. Strom Thurmond only got 4% of the popular vote but took 4 deep south states and 38 electors. Henry Wallace was a distant 4th. Truman saw the result as a mandate to push his legislative agenda. It wasn't. And his misreading of the election made 1952 almost too easy for the GOP.

1952

Truman's popularity never went very high in his second term and the events of the Korean War would give the GOP the feeling that it could take the White House. Early on the GOP was convinced it had the man for the job, Ohio Senator Robert Taft. But there was a growing segment of the party that didn't want Taft to carry their banner as they felt he was too much of an isolationist - he voted against the formation of NATO and in his floor speeches he fought for defensive military positions instead of interventionist ones. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts was one of the leading voices against Taft and in order to give the party a true alterntaive he began to court Dwight Eisenhower to run as a republican convinced that his popularity mixed with the low approval of Truman would give the GOP an easy win and also protect the interventionist ideals that the GOP was using to form its platform. Publically, Eisenhower continued to say he had no interest in the job, but behind the scenes he started working with Lodge to see what kind of support Eisenhower would have - the General would not enter the race unless he was assured of the nomination.

In January 1952 Eisenhower announced that he was a Republican and that if the party drafted him to serve his nation he would do so. The public ate it up. Eisenhower beat Taft in the first primary in New Hampshire. But in 1952 many of the states had yet to use the primary system, instead using party committe's to select the electors. Taft had a commanding lead with those delegates. But there were a large number of delegates in dispute - and the amount in dispute were enough to give the nomination to whoever won the fight to seat their delegates. Eisenhower's managers were better at their job than Taft's and they won the most important disputes and sat their delegates at the convention. As a result, Eisenhower won the nomination ont he first ballot. The guy that led the political fight at the convention was chosen to be Eisenhower's running mate as a reward - Richard Nixon.

The Democrats chose Adlai Stevenson as their top guy. In personal presence, Stevenson was no match for Eisenhower. And Eisenhower's team came up with a brilliant strategy in the election - they ignored Stevenson entirely and never once mentioned his name. Eisenhower instead ran against Harry Truman, the sitting President. And Stevenson was no match for Ike's resolve. Ike traveled the country speaking everywhere. When he took the stage in Wisconsin with Senator Joe McCarthy, the media and democrats attacked him for sharing space with the Senator. Eisenhower had promised to use the time on stage to attack McCarthy by praising General George Marshall whom McCarthy had attacked, but Eisenhower's handlers convinced him not to start a fight with McCarthy in his home state. The event hurt Ike but not enough. He also had to deal with scandal during the election when Richard Nixon was accused of using campaign money for personal use. In a massive speech, Nixon attacked the accusations head on and in a moment of briliant political theater, Nixon was adamant that he did nothing wrong and he would refuse to give up his daughter's dog, Checkers. The Checkers speech was a political high for Richard Nixon and it gave Ike the save-face ability to keep Nixon on the ticket.

On election day Eisenhower won 55% of the popular vote and 442 electors. Stevenson only managed to win some of the deep south but not all. But Eisenhower's victory proved to be just as much the people's affirmation of their support for Ike and not so much his party because he didn't carry Congress with him. The GOP still had work to do there.

1956

Ike's approval ratings were so high there was little doubt that he could run again if he wanted to. But he had told many a supporter that he fine only serving one term. Then in 1955 he suffered a heart attack and that made it very iffy that he would run again. But by 1956 he was given a clean bill of health and decided to run again. However, given his health question, many in the party considered the Vice President more important than ever. There were some, including Eisenhower himself, that wanted to choose a new VP and get rid of Nixon. Eisenhower met with his Vice President several times trying to convince him to step aside for the good of the party, but he never came out and said it directly because he didn't want to start a fight with Nixon that could hurt the party. And Nixon never took the hint, refusing to even consider stepping aside. And since Nixon had the support of many in the party there was little sense in fighting a civil war within the party when re-election was all but assured.

The Democrats again turned to Adlai Stevenson to run against Eisenhower. However this time, they were hard pressed to find any issue that they could effectively attack Ike on to win votes. Stevenson's campaign tried to argue that a vote for Eisenhower with his health issues was really a vote to put Nixon in the White House. It did little to help though in the face of growing international problems with the Soviet Union in the Suez Canal and other places. With the cold war in full swing and international problems that needed to be addressed, the people wanted a strong leader to stand up to Russia. Stevenson cut himself off at the knees when Soviet Premier Bulganin publically showed his support for Stevenson's plan for a nuclear test ban treaty. The GOP painted him as an appeaser and Eisenhower attacked him for making national security issues the basis for poltiical campaigns. All the episode did was give Ike more votes in the end. Ike was re-elected with more votes and more electors, taking 58% of the popular vote and 457 electors. But again, the win was Eisenhower's and not the GOP's for they failed to gain seats again in the Congress. Eisenhower would be the first President to win the office without his party gaining seats in either chamber of Congress since Zachary Taylor. It was obvious looking back that Ike was the favorite of the people, but when it came to policy and politics, the country was leaning more towards the Democrats and if they were able to nominate someone who also had some sense of personal presence they would be able to take the White House again.

1960

And man, did the Democrats learn from their mistakes. The election of 1960 was a watershed moment in American politics for many reasons. The growing Civil Rights movement was coming to a head, society itself was starting to change as the children of the 1950's became the young minds of the 1960's. Technology was beginning to outpace anyone's fervent wish, the Cold War was getting hotter and hotter and television was going to make its mark and change presidential politics forever. And the election saw the first time that the two men running for the office of President were born in the 20th century.

For the democrats, there were basically three men that were going to be talked about. The darling of the left wing of the party, Senator Hubert Humphry. The best ont he ground politician for either party, Senator Lyndon B. Johnson. And the rising star who looked like he was cut from the mold that makes President's, Senator John F. Kennedy. Humphrey was an early favorite and his plan was to win his home state of Minnesota, grow his popularity in the midwest and use it to win his neighboring state of Wisconsin in an effort to have a large base from which to show the entire party that he had wide spread support that he could win the nation. Kennedy on the other hand understood the power of money in the election. And his guys were political savants. Kennedy focused on crushing Humphrey in the West Virginia primary. Kennedy needed to show the party that a silver spoon Catholic could win such a blue collar state. And working towards Kennedy's advantage, West Virginia was the only state that allowed campaigns to pay both workers and voters to show up and vote. Humphrey bankrupted himself thoring everything he had into West Virginia, even liquidating his daughters college savings account to fight Kennedy. But Kennedy had too much money to fight. When Kennedy took the state, Humphrey abandoned the race.

But Johnson was still out there. Kennedy easily defeated him on the first ballot, but in an effort to keep the south together and supporting this rich northeast Catholic, he then tapped Johnson to be his Vice President. Humphrey was enraged thinking that he should at least get that seat given the support he had in the midwet, but the south was more important. And given some of the doubt about Kennedy, he neede a power player like Johnson on his team.

The republicans turned to the most nationally recognizable man they had, Vice President Richard Nixon. Kennedy's main weaknesses from a PR perspective were his catholic religion and his age. But Nixon was only 4 years older making that issue much less powerful. On the religion front, Kennedy gave several speeches and even allowed himself to be questions by leading clergy of the day on his temperment as it related to the interplay of church and state to order to allieviate that concern. It worked. But Kennedy was then going to have to deal with the fact that Nixon was a national name and recognized by every household as Vice President and for his work in Congress prior. And that is where television played its part.

For the first time, the people would be witness to a debate between the two men running for the highest office. The first debate drew 70 million viewers. Nixon was recovering from the flu and came away looking awful on camera. Those who listened to the debate on radio strongly suggested that Nixon won the debate. But for those that watched, Kennedy took the win. Nixon also weakened himself by pledgin early on to campaign in all 50 states, which required throwing resources into states that weren't as important while Kennedy could focus on the big states. The pledge took far too much money away from the Nixon campaign in the face of the money that Kennedy had.

The election was close. Kennedy won the popular vote by 120,000 votes out of a record 68.8 million cast. In the college Kennedy won 303-219. With Kennedy only "winning" Illiinois by 7,000 votes the republican national committee went to court alleging voter fraud. There were also stories of similar problems in Texas. In California, Kennedy was declared the winner until all the absentee votes were counted and Nixon took the state. John Kennedy was going to bring a new era into the White House. Richard Nixon's quest for the top seat in government seemed over for good. And then just 3 years later everything changed.

1964

After the assassination of President Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson took the seat of government and led to very large positive ratings in polls. By the time of the election his nomination was a foregone conclusion. For Vice President, he chose the one time stepped over Hubert Humphrey in order to balance the ticket. Meanwhile, the GOP was a mess. The old moderate republicans were in a battle with the growing conservative leaders of the party and their leader, Barry Goldwater. After a bloody fight for the power of the party, Goldwater and the conservatives took the nomination and in his acceptance speech he directly attacked the moderates in the party. That single act destroyed the GOP that year. Massive amounts of moderates that were once members of the GOP refused to support Goldwater and eventually voted for Johnson. Goldwater's campaign was awful as the conservatives were unable to understand the power of the media and television. Johnson and democrats used the media perfectly and Johnson's most famous television ad is still considered one of the best in political history - the ad of the little girl in the field counting down to 10 when a nuclear explosion goes off in the background. It was easy to paint Goldwater as crazy and his attacks on his own party did little to dispel that notion to the general public.

When the election was finally over, Lyndon Johnson took the largest win in American history. 43 million votes, 62% of the popular vote and 486 electors. Goldwater only managed to win 6 states (the deep south and his own Arizona).And he only won Arizona by about 5,000 votes.

 
54. Lucky Luciano

There's no such thing as good money or bad money. There's just money.

There are criminals that have been much more famous in American popular culture, such as Al Capone, Jesse James, and Charles Manson, to name a few. None of them are nearly as important to American history as Salvatore Lucania, known in America as Charles "Lucky" Luciano. The first Don of the Genovese Family of New York, Luciano was the mastermind behind the Mafia in the United States. He originally made his fortune bootlegging during Prohibition. He is responsible for the organized gambling in America which ultimately led to the establishment of Las Vegas, Nevada. He was the man behind the development of modern Miami, and pre-Castro Cuba. He controlled unions and docks in New York City and was considered so important to the war effort that he was secretly let out of prison in order to make the waterfront accessible for large scale military use.

After the war Luciano was deported, but from Italy and Havana he continued to exercise a tremendous influence on organized gambling, drug smuggling, unions, and nightclubs within the USA. He finally died in 1962 of a heart attack, and since his death no single Mafia boss has come close to having the amount of power that Luciano held. He is without a doubt the greatest criminal in American history.

"Greatest criminal" does not equal "greatest American" and I struggled with this pick. I recognized the Cosa Nostra's tremendous importance and influence upon American culture, but I really wasn't sure he belonged on this list. (I was sure that IF he belonged, it would be fairly high up middle of the pack, and not at the bottom.) But in the end I decided that organized gambling, drugs, bootlegging and control of unions is pretty damn diverse and just as important as several other more legitimate industries which I wanted to recognize. Time Magazine apparently agrees with this analysis as they named Luciano one of their 20 greatest businessmen of the 20th century.

Up next: One of our greatest visionaries of the motion picture...

 
1932

And they got it. The Great Depression destroyed Herbert Hoover. The Bonus Army incident didn't help either. With the economy destroyed and millions out of work, the GOP was seen as the problem and the people revolted against them. The GOP convention nominated Hoover on the first ballot but there was no energy and no firebrand speeches. They were convinced that they were going to lose. The Democrats finally sensing an opportunity to get the White House again Several names were on the top of everyone's minds but the biggest was Franklin Roosevelt. Recovering from polio and being paralyzed there were many that felt he couldn't do the job or be seen as Presidential. But his political machine was brilliant and he took the nomination on the 4th ballot. Breaking with tradition and because it was politically necessary to show a personal power Roosevelt became the first presidential candidate to address his party's convention personally and accept the nomination. With the depression laying at Hoover's feet, FDR ran a very steady and smart campaign to make sure he kept that anger at the forefront and the people focused on Hoover's failure and not any problems on the Democrat side.

It worked. FDR obliterated Hoover. Hoover only managed to win Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maine, Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire. Roosevelt tood every other state, 472 electors, and 58% of the popular vote. His promised new deal with the American people resonated and began a 12 year trek for Roosevelt that would see the world plunge itself into ultimate and total war.
FDR promised to promote a balanced budget and spending cuts. His most important campaign promise was to repeal Prohibition. That one he kept.

 
Almost Done with the Electoral College......

1948

Harry Truman had a fight on his hands. Within the Democratic Party, many felt that he was a weak candidate whose low approval ratings would give the republicans the White House for the first time in what seemed like forever. Internal players began making overtures to General Dwight Eisenhower whom the party believed was a Democrat. It was not until the eve of the convention when Eisenhower made it clear that he wasn't a democrat, but Truman wasn't out of the woods yet. Truman's former SecCommerce, Henry Wallace - who was also Vice President under FDR - declared that he was going to run with the Progressive Party. Truman's left flank was going to be a problem. The southen wing of his party also was growing restless. Truman tried to balance his projected policy on civil rights in order to appease them enough to keep their votes in line. But with the leadership of Senator Hubert Humphry pro-civil rights democrats forced their agenda into the Democratic Party platform. Truman hoped he would still be able to keep the south in the party but he couldn't. Mississippi's delagation and most of Alabama's stormed out after the plank was voted in. They eventually would form their own party - the States Rights Party - and nominate Governor Strom Thurmond as their candidate for President. With the far left leaving the party and the deep south not there, Truman won the nomination fairly easily.

For the GOP, New York Governor Thomas Dewey was again called into service. He was the most successful opponent in the face of FDR and the GOP felt he could grow that base to achieve victory. As his running mate they chose the future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Earl Warren. Truman immediately attacked the GOP by calling the Congress into session to prove to the people that they were a do-nothing Congress. He set forth a large legislative agenda that he knew the GOP would never pass, but he wanted the do-nothing story to lead the news. Truman then took to the campaign traveling the country giving speeches at every stop, meeting with voters personally. Dewey on the other hand was never a good publi speaker and because of that there was little fire in his campaign. Still, by mid October, polls said that Dewey was going to win by 5 or 6 points.

As voters took to the polls many thought Dewey would win as Truman was seen as unable to get over the unpopular ratings he had. But the polls didn't take into account Truman's campaign and how he connected with the average voter when he would talk to them. We've all seen the newspaper photo with Truman holding a headline that said Dewey defeats Truman so we know the result. Truman received 49.5% of the popular vote to Dewey's 45.1%. It was a 303-189 win the college. Strom Thurmond only got 4% of the popular vote but took 4 deep south states and 38 electors. Henry Wallace was a distant 4th. Truman saw the result as a mandate to push his legislative agenda. It wasn't. And his misreading of the election made 1952 almost too easy for the GOP.
This was probably the most interesting election of the 20th century and it may tell us a lot about the current day, because all throughout that year voters expressed their disgust with the "Establishment." Although Strom Thurmond and Henry Wallace ended up getting very little of the final tally, they were thought to play important factors that would contribute heavily to Dewey's win. Truman's comeback was truly remarkable.

 
1964

After the assassination of President Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson took the seat of government and led to very large positive ratings in polls. By the time of the election his nomination was a foregone conclusion. For Vice President, he chose the one time stepped over Hubert Humphrey in order to balance the ticket. Meanwhile, the GOP was a mess. The old moderate republicans were in a battle with the growing conservative leaders of the party and their leader, Barry Goldwater. After a bloody fight for the power of the party, Goldwater and the conservatives took the nomination and in his acceptance speech he directly attacked the moderates in the party. That single act destroyed the GOP that year. Massive amounts of moderates that were once members of the GOP refused to support Goldwater and eventually voted for Johnson. Goldwater's campaign was awful as the conservatives were unable to understand the power of the media and television. Johnson and democrats used the media perfectly and Johnson's most famous television ad is still considered one of the best in political history - the ad of the little girl in the field counting down to 10 when a nuclear explosion goes off in the background. It was easy to paint Goldwater as crazy and his attacks on his own party did little to dispel that notion to the general public.

When the election was finally over, Lyndon Johnson took the largest win in American history. 43 million votes, 62% of the popular vote and 486 electors. Goldwater only managed to win 6 states (the deep south and his own Arizona).And he only won Arizona by about 5,000 votes.
Goldwater was the last non-establishment the GOP ever nominated. (Reagan was non-establishment in 1976 but not in 1980.) Until now?

 
Let's see if wee can finish up in this one....

1968

Trying to rebuild his image after losing to Kennedy and then losing in his campaign to be Governor of California, Richard Nixon began moving up again in the Republican party and was the keynote speaker at the 1964 convention giving the nomination speech introducing Barry Goldwater. That election, Nixon campaigned hard for Goldwater and even though the GOP was demolished in the election, the conservative base of the party respected Nixon for his hard work for them. But with Goldwater being destroyed the conservative based luckily gained a new standard-barer - Ronald Reagan. Becoming the champion of the conservative wing of the party the death of the GOP that many thought happened was averted and coming into the next election cycle, Reagan was a name in the front of everyone's mind. But he never held office before. To make that a non-issue he ran and won in a landslide for the Governor's seat in California. At the same time, Nixon was working on the party gaining friendships in a bid for the upcoming 1968 cycle.

Nixon's work on the party paid off. Coupled with a series of television events to paint Nixon in a different light he had a large machine behind him. When the convention finally gathered, Nixon gained the majority of votes and the nomination. Reagan, ever the politician, moved to make the vote unanimous and asked his supporters to vote for Nixon, which they did. Nixon was back, and with his work with the party and their gains in Congress the GOP convention looked like a well oiled machine, full of unity (especially after Reagan did what he did) and a clear direct message to the American people.

In sharp contrast, the Democratic convention was a nightmare. Vietnam was tearing the party apart. Anti-war leader Eugene McCarthy had such a strong showing in the New Hampshire primary that it was the final straw that forced President Johnson to announce that he would not seek another term. By June, Robert Kennedy entered the race and immediately gained such traction that he won the primary in California. That night, in the midst of the movement in the party that looked like he would be the nominee to gain the office his brother served in, Robert Kennedy was assassinated. At the Chicago convention, the Democratic party was at war with itself. Anti-war protestors would not be stopped and their leaders in the convention tried to fight the old gaurd led by Johnson's supporters. When Johnson's men got the convention to nominate Vice President Hubert Humphrey, the anti-war demonstrations led to riots. The GOP was calm, cool and collected, and the Democrats were a garbage fire.

Nixon opened the campaign with a double digit lead and not even the third party candidacy of George Wallace looked like it could stop him. Nixon refused to debate Humphrey and instead simply outspent him everywhere. But by election day the lead had evaporated. Johnson's peace plan with North Vietnam that would halt the bombing brought the democrats together with the hope that they could continue towards peace. Nixon supported the idea publically, but privately his campaign attempted to force the South to not take part in the peace process. In the end, Wallace's campaign took votes from both sides, but more from Democrats in the south and in a close popular vote (only 500,000 vote difference out of 71 million cast) Nixon won the day. He took the college 301-191 with Wallace taking four deep south states and 45 electors. Richard Nixon was back.

1972

And he should have accepted it. But he couldn't. Nixon was going to be re-elected. He was easily renominated and the best the Democrats had to stand against him was Senator George McGovern. Nixon started the season with a massive lead that he never lost and it only grew after McGovern's choice for VP, Thomas Eagleton, had his issues. Nixon won 49 states, 61% of the popular vote and 520 electors. Watergate wasn't necessary for victory. The ghosts that Nixon saw were never there and in an election that should have cemented his legacy in a good way, he ended up having to resign the office he fought so hard to obtain for 20 years.

1976

Having never been elected by the party at large, Gerald Ford had a fight on his hands. Ronald Reagan was coming to the front of the party faster and faster. Polls in 1975 said the GOP favored Reagan over Ford. The primary season was a back and forth battle with wins by one and then the other. By the time of the convention, Ford had a small lead over Reagan. Using the power of his office, Ford began buying votes from key delegates with trips to the White House and coming up with patronage jobs for key people. The gambit paid off and Ford won the nomination on the first ballot by only 60 votes. The Democrats turned to Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter whose direct message to the American people that he would never lie to them captured the party in the wake of Watergate. When the conventions ended Carter had an amazing 34 point lead over Ford that Ford fought against the entire election season. Carter gave his interview to Playboy magazine that hurt his polling numbers but shortly after Ford made a bigger mistake with a huge mistep in their debates. Due to Watergate, Vietnam, cultural changes and the general sense that Washington was no place for the American people, the amount of voting in this election was at the lowest since before World War II. Carter won 297 to 240 in the college making it a very close election where the popular vote was only different by less than a million votes.

1980

Ronald Reagan was running for the office from the second Ford took the nomination in 1976. Many thought it was a foregone conclusion. But as the primary season approached, George H W Bush threw his hat in the ring along with a few others. Not realizing that he would have to truly fight for the nomination Reagan lost the first Iowa primary to Bush. It set off a fierce battle within the party against the two men and the conservative and more moderate wing of the party. But Reagan was too big of a force and by the time of the nomination he steamrolled the party. Looking to make sure the party stuck together he then chose George HW Bush to be his running mate. Jimmy Carter was going to have a fight on his hands. When the conventions closed Reagan polled in a commanding lead against Carter.

A series of missteps by Reagan early in the cycle gave the Democrats the sense that victory was possible and they closed ranks around Carter. Reagan's team started facing many issues that weren't ready for and to stem the growing trend of attacks, Regan brought back into the fold the campaign manager that he used to win the California governor's seat. It worked. The campaign righted the ship and focused solely on Carter's record. Carter started hitting Reagan so hard that even some Democrats were worried that he was going too far. When the two debated, Reagan came out looking like a clear and better alternative than Carter. And Carter had to deal with the Iran hostage situation which hurt his standing with the electorate. By the time of the election Reagan's team was confident that he would win. The third party candidacy of John Anderson took some votes away from Carter and the culmination of everything was Reagan winning with 51% of the vote to Carter's 41%. The 489-49 college win was a landslide for Reagan and the conservative wing of the GOP. Reagan reshaped the GOP taking conservative democrats from the south away from their parent party and showring up undecided voters to break heavily in his favor. Reagan's campaign was so successful that the GOP took control of the Senate for the first time in 40 years and picked up 54 seats in the house.

1984

Reagan was going to be renominated and most thought he was going to win easily. The Democrats nominted Walter Mondale whose campaign came up with a strategy to acknowledge the popularity of the President but question the long term sustainibility of his policies. The GOP ran basically on autopilot for much of the election heading into the first debate. The lead was considered too big to lose. Except that by not preparing for the first debate, Reagan came off looking old and unable to address the issues in the nation giving rise to support for the calls that he was too old to run again. The campaign bunkered down and in the face of Mondale gaining some steam they readied Reagan for the next debate. When the question about his age finally came up, Reagan won the election by stating deadpan, "I will not make age an issue in this campaign and I will not, for political purposes exploit my opponent's youth and inexperience." The line brought the house down and Mondale himself laughed at the joke making the issue dead from that point forward. Reagan's lead in the polls shot up 17 points after that debate. Mondale could only muster enough support to win his own state in the election and Reagan took a 525 to 13 college win and 60-40% edge in the popular vote. Ronald Reagan was poised to be considered among the greatest of Presidents.

1988

The GOP needed a new leader now that Reagan was done. VP Bush was the heir apparant but Senatore Robert Dole and Pat Robertson ran as well. And so did New York Congressman Jack Kemp. When Bush lost the first primary coming in thrid to Dole and Robertson the party looked like it could be a mess. Bush had to fight the public perception of being wimpy and he did, reinvigorating his campaign, winning New Hampshire and then capturing Super Tuesday. Bush would go on to take the nomination and run on the successes of the Reagan years. The Democrats nominted liberal Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis. The GOP went after the liberal opponent on every issue famously claiming he would be soft on crime with the Willy Horton ads. The GOP's only problem was VP nominee Dan Quayle who was a problem from the start and who was destroyed by Lloyd Bentsen in the VP debate. But it didn't matter. The success of the Reagan years carried Bush to victory and claimed 426 electors to Dukakis' 111. It appeared that Bush would be able to serve his own 8 years giving the support he had to start.

1992

And then politics changed again. For many on these boards the election of William Jefferson Clinton as President is a memory still relatively fresh and so the complete review of the electoral map is unnecessary. After showing an amazing political power that not many realized he had until it was too late, Clinton stormed to the nomination at the convention and then campaigned with a political skill that is close to unmatched in American political history. A youthful leader who talked to a new generation, Clinton was able to paint Bush as an out of touch old rich guy who only cared about other out of touch old rich guys. H. Ross Perot - one of those out of touch old rich guys - flirted with the American people as well, and in doing so changed the nature of the political debate in the country. The incumbent President didn't have to fight one challenger but had to fight to be heard over two challengers who each gave their own story of why the country was having problems. Clinton took 370 electors in the election to Bush's 168. It looked like the Democrats would be storming into another 8 years of the White House to go along with the Congress that they held for the better part of 40 years.

1996

Except 1994 happened. And when the GOP took Congress the re-electrion prospects of Bill Clinton weren't great. But in true Bill Clinton fashion he rose above the problems and scandals and not only won re-election against Senator Robert Dole - he killed him winning 379-159 in the college. But the GOP kept their power in Congress and it was going to be interesting to see how the next election shook out.

2000

Pretty uneventful. Texas Governor George W. Bush beat Vice President Al Gore in a close election, 271-266 in the college. I seem to remember something in Florida too, but it was probably minor.

2004

Seriously - we all know what happened in 2000. In 2004 Bush faced off against John Kerry. The results of the election were nearly identical to 2000 without the hanging chads. Without looking the daily ins and outs of that election can be found somewhere on this forum.

2008 & 2012

As can these elections. Starting from the first election in 1789 to the election of 2008 the United States was a country led by powerful white men, the first dozen or more slave holders, and all of whom for the most part were part of the same circle of power. There were outliers, sure. But just about all of them were part of the institutions of power that this country has seen guide it through over 200 years. Governors, Congressmen, Senators, Generals, and other forms of top level statesmen it was rare when a true presidential contender didn't come from those halls. In 2008 the prime contender was from the same cloth - a Senator. But with a catch. Barack Obama was black. And never before in our history had a black leader had such a force of political power and gravitas mixed with an actual ability to gain electoral ground that the attainment of the highest office in the nation was possible. There were other contenders to be sure. But none like Barack Obama. And in 2008, against Senator John McCain and relative unknown Governor of Alaska who will be a comedy stop for the rest of campaign history, Barack Obama became the first black man to win the White House. His re-election in 2012 against Mitt Romney only solidifed his footing in history.

As we get back to the rankings of the Presidents in our history Obama is going to be an interesting one to rank. The story and the history that he represents is towering. It will be a focal point of history textbooks for a long, long time. And because of that his supporters, like supporters of Reagan, are going to fight tooth and nail to make sure that he is propelled to the heights of our history.

And so we come to a close on the review of the electoral history of the office of President. There are a few lessons for the major party's to learn from this snapshot: (1) a broken party almost never wins, (2) sometimes the times you run in control who wins more than the men who run, and (3) and maybe most important, whether we like it or not and whether we truly understand it or not, for the most part, if you want to be the nominee for your party's highest office, you better have a base of support that will not waiver in the face of any opposition from within that party. If you can do that, you can be nominated. And if you can be nominated, you just never know.

Unless your name is Donald Trump. There is no explanation that speaks in a language of logic that can truly decipher the fantasy that is his campaign right now. I hope.

 
The Office of Vice President of the United States

Initially, the office was deisgned by the Constitution to be held by the person who received the second most electoral votes for President. This created a problem by the third election when John Adams main rival, Thomas Jefferson, ended up being his Vice President. It came to an ultiamte head when in the next election Jefferson and his running mate Aaron Burr tied in the college and there was a long drawn out fight over who was going to be President. To alleviate that problem the 12th Amendment was passed requiring electors to cast ballots for each office separately. The office again caused issues because there was still no clear cut way to deal with a vacancy in the office and as a result several President's did not have Vice Presidents - it happened 16 times before the passage of the 25th Amendment that set forth the procedure for ascendency to the office.

The history of the relationships between the President's and their Vice Presidents is fairly consistent - very rarely do they get along, very rarely do they work together, and more often than not they downright hate each other.

John Adams

George Washington basically ignored Adams and would not allow him to attend cabinet meetings, seeing him as a member of the legislature and not the executive office. Adams tried to run the Senate the way the Constitution seemed to require but it resulted in his reputation being hit hard. By the middle of his second term in the office he backed off from daily interactions with the Senate.

Thomas Jefferson

As Adams' rival for the office, Jefferson wasn't an ally as Vice President. He didn't care for the office at all but did take the time to work with the Senate to write the first true set of rules for the upper house. But as political realities made Jefferson and Adams work less and less together Jefferson eventually began working against the President while still in the office. Their friendship prior was destroyed and reignited for decades as they approached their final days.

Aaron Burr

Since the 11th Amendment wasn't in place yet, Burr and Jefferson tied in the electoral college. Everyone who was anyone knew that Jefferson was the choice for President - except Aaron Burr. He did nothing to ease the problem and allowed the House to tie itself in knots before Jefferson was finally chosen by the House to success Adams. As a result Jefferson hated Burr and pretty uch never spoke to him again.

George Clinton

Replacing Aaron Burr on the Jefferson ticket in Jefferson's re-election, Clinton also had little relationship with Jefferson. However he handled the office well and was a good soldier. So much so that in the next election he was once again tapped to be Vice President, this time under President Madison. He served in the office until his death in 1812 making him the first Vice President to die in office.

Elbridge Gerry

After the death of Vice President Clinton, Madison had no Vice President until the next election when he chose Gerry to be his running mate. Madison charged him with dealing with political handouts in the northeast which he did well for his President. He died in 1814 leaving another vacancy for Madison until the end of his second term.

Daniel Thompkins

President Monroe agreed to him being on the ticket for his recognition in New York. He served in the office well enough that Monroe ran with him again four years later. But years of lawsuits by Tompkins against the Government for reimbursement of debts from the War of 1812 ruined his life and he became a fall down drunk, presiding over the Senate many days fully intoxicated. Three months after the end of the Monroe second term he died from his alcoholism.

John C. Calhoun

Calhoun ran for President in the election but wasn't nominted by his home state and so he chose to seek the Vice Presidency office. After the Adams-Jackson election devolved into a fight with the House of Representatives they ultimately selected Adams on a close ballot, but resoundedly chose Calhoun to be Vice President. He was never an ally of Adams' and by the end of Adams term he supported Jackson. So much so, that when Jackson won in the next election, he ran with Calhoun as his Vice President.

Martin Van Buren

When Jackson ran for re-election Van Buren was his closest advisor and top political operative. Jackson took the first opportunity to have Van Buren join him on the ticket to replace Calhoun. Van Buren's support of Jackson in Senate debates made it clear that Jackson would support him when the next election came around.

Richard Mentor Johnson

When Van Buren ran for President himself, the party settled on Johnson to be Vice President. Van Buren largely ignored him for the entirety of his time in office. He had such little influence that during the end of the first term he went home and opened a bar.

John Tyler

When the party selected William Henry Harrison to run for office, they also selected John Tyler to be Vice President. Harrison sought Tyler's advice on cabinet and other appointments but Harrison fell ill and died far too quick into his time in office to have any semblence of story to tell about Tyler as a Vice President.

George M. Dallas

When Polk rose to get the nomination of the party they also chose Dallas to be his Vice President. A long serving politician, Polk relied on him very little, but Dallas was one of the more important diplomats in our nation's history. The time he served as Vice President is a blip on the larger story of his life of service. And he was a lifelong enemy of James Buchanan - which makes him most likely a pretty decent guy. Dallas County Texas is named in his honor and there is a dispute whether or not the city of Dallas is named for him as well.

Millard Fillmore

When the Whigs nominated Zachary Taylor to be President they needed to balance the ticket to keep the party together over the growing problem of slavery and turned to Fillmore who could carry New York for them. He was also selected to make sure that William Seward was not given a position of power in the government. It isn't very clear how much Zachary Taylor worked with Fillmore but the assumption is he did solely due to the fact that Taylor had no political background. Fillmore presided over the Senate as the debates raged over what would become the Compromise of 1850, a bill that Fillmore ultimate supported while Taylor probably would have vetoed.

William R. King

When the Democrats selected Franklin Pierce they chose King to run with him. King fell ill almost immediately after they won the election and left the United States for Cuba to be treated. He was sworn in to the office while in Cuba but his health never got better and he died about a week later having never been in Washington as Vice President and never serving President Pierce.

John C. Breckinridge

He supported Franklin Pierce's renomination and when that was obviousl going nowhere he threw his support to his closest friend in the Senate, Stephen Douglas. Douglas lost the nomination to James Buchanan. The party attempted to draft Breckinridge to be Vice President to help keep Douglas supporters happy but he declined the office. It set off several dozen ballots where other names couldn't garner any support. Eventually the delegates began voting for him and he eventually said he would accept the nomination. He actively campaigned for the Buchanan. But Buchanan never liked or trusted him since he supported others in the nomination process. The two also didn't see eye to eye on policy and their inability to do so led to misunderstandings and ultimately a broken relationship where Buchanan very rarely spoke to him.

Hannibal Hamlin

When the Republicans seleted Abraham Lincoln to be their nominee the chose Hamlin to balance the ticket and get a northeast leader in the frey. The two didn't meet until after they were both nominated. With the coming civil war, Hamlin had little power in Lincoln's White House and eventually decided to leave Washington and return home where he served in the Maine militia. When his unit was called up in 1864 he chose to stay and serve and ended up being the cook for the regiment. When Lincoln ran again though it was decided that a new Vice President was needed.

Andrew Johnson

Johnson was chosen for being a loyal Union democrat in the midst of civil war. He campaigned hard for the ticket he was on and when Lincoln was re-elected Johnson thought he was going to have a very important position in the government. But in his speech to the Congress he was visibly drunk and made a fool of himself. Lincoln followed him up with his great Second Inaugural Address (John Wilkes Booth was in the crowd) and Johnson hid from public view for weeks. Johnson would not again be in the presence of Lincoln until April 14, 1865 when he met him in the morning to discuss how Lincoln was going to treat the rebels after the war. Johnson came away from that meeting thinking that he repaired his image and that Lincoln trusted him again. Lincoln, for his part, was recorded as saying that he knew Johnson made a mistake and wasn't a drunk. But that night the world stopped turning when Abraham Lincoln was shot.

Johnson was supposed to be killed to. Booth's plan was to kill Lincoln, Johnson, General Grant and Secretary of State Seward to cripple the government's ability to function. Grant refused to attend the theatre with Lincoln and so he wasn't there. The man tasked to kill Seward attacked him in his home severely wounding him but he survived. The man tasked to kill Johnson got drunk and though was in a position to do it and get away with it lost his nerve and didn't attack Johnson. Johnson pledged to make everyone pay for killing Lincoln and he had a few days of solid leadership as President before it all went to hell.

Schuyler Colfax

Chosen to help balance the ticket and bring some experience into the White House for President Grant, Colfax it appears immediately set to get caught up in any game that would make him money leading to the Credit Mobilier Scandal. He had no chance to be renominted for the office again.

Henry Wilson

Wilson took the nomination when Colfax had to deal with scandal. But almost as soon as he was elected with Grant it turned out that he was one of the people that Colfax bribed in the scandal. He denied the accusation and was ultimately cleared but he died in office.

William Wheeler

It's 1877 and we finally have a Vice President who was good friends with and worked well with the President, Rutherford B. Hayes. Wheeler spent a great deal of time with Hayes and the two worked well together. He agreed with Hayes to not seek a second term and retired from politics in 1881.

Chester A. Arthur

The party wanted Arthur on the ticket because of his ability to raise money which he did and did well. When Garfield and Arthur won, Arthur pressured Garfield to fill cabinet jobs with Arthur's New York supporters. The entirety of Garfield's administration was seen dealing with appointment issues. In the battle Garfield and Arthur did not see eye to eye and their relationship was fairly destroyed. Arthur went home to New York to work with his own supporters and it was there that he found out that Garfield had been shot. Arthur did not want to be seen as jumping into the office while Garfield held on to life and for the weeks in between Garfield being shot and the day he died the executive office almost didn't exist.

Thomas A. Hendricks

The party chose him to run with Cleveland so that they could win his home state of Indiana. After winning the election Hendricks fell ill. He died a few months later having only held the office for a few months.

Levi Morton

He was chosen to run with President Harrison again to balance the ticket (get the common theme). When Harrison tried to get the Lodge Bill passed in Congress Morton did nothing to support it in the Senate where the bill died. Harrison blamed him for the lose and never worked with him again. When Harrison stood for re-election, again against Cleveland, he was replaced on the ballot.

Adlai Stevenson

Selected because they wanted to win Illinois, Stevenson actually wanted the job. And he enjoyed it, using it as a platform to get his political supporters and friends jobs whenever he could. He got along well with President Cleveland and genually liked the President, although Cleveland never fully trusted him.

Garret Hobart

Hobart ran the New York part of the GOP election for William McKinley and was a very good politician. McKinley grew to trust him a great deal and Hobart is America's first Vice President to actively support and work with the President on every issue during an administration. The media at the time called him the Assistant President because he and McKinley worked so well together. But as the turn of the century was approaching Hobart fell ill and died leaving President McKinley as distraut as one would be if they lost a close family member.

Theodore Roosevelt

McKinley agreed to make him the VP nom because he didn't want him anywhere near the War Department an figured that as Vice President he would be functionally muted in policy. Roosevelt took to campaigning with a natural stature that the country would come to know in the decade ahead.

Charles Fairbanks

Roosevelt was convinced to allow him to join the ticket as he was a strong supporter of McKinley's in the Senate. He served in the office for the entire term though Roosevelt rarely worked with him. He thought that Roosevelt would support his candidacy for the office in 1908 but instead Teddy wanted William Howard Taft. Not to be slighted so easily Fairbanks spent a great deal of time and money in 1912 supporting Taft over Roosevelt. In 1916 Fairbanks was in charge of the Republican party platform and hoped to run for President then. But instead he got the VP nod and lost to Woodrow Wilson's team.

James Sherman

The party wanted Sherman to balance Taft and give a voice to the New York slate in the party. Initially at odds, Taft and Sherman became close and worked together well. When Taft ran again in 1912 he wanted Sherman by his side. But Sherman died weeks before the election.

Thomas R. Marshall

A contender himself for President, When Woodrow Wilson won the nomination the Indiana delegation made it clear that they would only accept Marshall as Vice President. Wilson needed the state and promised Marshall that he would be an important part of the administration. But the two never agreed on policy and eventually Wilson would eventually speak to Senators directly without the Vice President being a part of the discussion. But to keep the party together and not have any problems in re-election Wilson kept him on the ticket making Marshall the first Vice President to win with his President since James Monroe. When Wilson suffered a stroke towards the end of his second term Wilson's wife refused to allow Marshall anywhere near the President for fear that he would try to remove Wilson from office. However, history seems to record that MArshall, to his credit, wanted no part of something like that and actively fought cabinet members who wanted him to force the issue.

The 29th Vice President of the United States, Calvin Colidge will begin the second part of our story....

 
Vice Presidents continued since it is so interesting....

Calvin Coolidge

Coolidge wasn't supposed to be the VP. The party bosses put forth another name and then left the convention to party thinking that the rank and file would just do what they wanted. They were wrong. Tired of the bosses forcing them to do what they wanted Coolidge's name was put forth and he steamrolled to the nomination. Harding, however, liked Coolidge and invited him to take part in cabinet meetings making him the first Vice President to do so. It also probably helped Harding focus on more important things like having sex with his mistress in his office and playing poker all night.

Charles G. Dawes

When Coolidge ran for re-election he wanted several other people first. The first four men to be offered the nomination for Vice President declined and Dawes was the next man up. Coolidge accepted his nomination thinking he wouldbe a good soldier. He was wrong. The day of the election Dawes informed Coolidge that he would not take part in cabinet meetings like Coolidge did and that he dispised the rules of Senate. After being sworn in he attacked the Senate chamber for their rules and destroyed his relationship with Coolidge.

Charles Curtis

Selected to be Hoover's running mate the two worked well together and the the party was happy with him and his guidance of the Senate and work with the administration. Many congressmen went to Curtis with their needs and favors instead of Hoover because of his good relationship within the party.

John Nance Garner

As FDR's star was rising at the convention and it was clear that FDR was going to win eventually, Garner, who was also running for Presdient, made a deal with FDR that he would through his support to FDR if he was made Vice President. FDR agreed. He enjoyed a good relationship with FDR the first term though he had very little influence in policy. The relationship was good enough that Garner ran again with FDR when the two were up for re-election. During the second term the two clashed and Garner openly opposed much of FDR's plans. When the 8 years were up, Garner ran for President and when FDR entered the race as well he continued to run ending his relationship with FDR and his time in office.

Henry Wallace

Without Garner for the third term FDR picked Henry Wallace to run with him. The party was not happy with the selection as Wallace was seen as too liberal and the southern democrats were furious. FDR threatened the convention that he would remove his name from nomination if they continued and the eventually backed down. FDR gave Wallace a lot of power in the 3rd term as he was a true believer in the New Deal domestic agenda. He served in various capacities for FDR and was growing in influence while at the same time the more conservative elements of the party hated him more and more. When FDR agreed to run for a 4th term, he had to work with the anti-Wallace parts of the party and while the general public supported Wallace, FDR instead turned to Harry Truman.

Harry Truman

FDR and Truman only met together once the entire time Truman was Vice President. He was not made part of anything the administration did and was not made aware of any war plans or even the development of the atomic bomb. When Truman became President he was astonished at just how much he didn't know about the plans that FDR had.

Alben Barkley

He was not Truman's first choice to join the ticket but once he was selected he worked hard for Truman. Barkley was a life long public servent and well respected in every corner of the Congress. Truman asked him to give the keynote speech at the convention and it brought the house down and recharged the party. Truman himself appeared in the Senate chamber to give Barkley the Congressional Gold Medal for his years of service. The two worked well together and respected each other. Barkley wanted to run for President when Truman accounced he wouldn't run again but the party felt he was too old at the time.

Richard Nixon

Eisenhower informed the party that he had no preference for a running mate and the party bosses rewarded the young Nixon for his work in Congress. Beginning what has become a tradition, Eisenhower campaigned with the positive messages while Nixon was left to be the attack dog in the election. Eisenhower never got along with Nixon and pretty much hated him. When Eisenhower suffered a heart attack in his first term the 25th Amednment wasn't in place yet meaning that there was no clear cut method for power to devolve to the Vice President. Nixon stepped in and ran the cabinet without ever coming close to trying to seize power and made sure no one in the cabinet did either. The party respected him for handling the issue so well. However, when he decided to run again Eisenhower didn't want Nixon on the ticket again. He tried to drop hints every chance he got without speaking to him directly about the matter but Nixon never took the hint. Eisenhower relented not wanting to start a war in the party and Nixon served with him in the second term as well.

Lyndon Johnson

Kennedy needed Johnson to secure the south in the election though he didn't like him and Robert Kennedy hated him. After the election Johnson tried to make the office more powerful by trying to persuade Kennedy to have all national security matters go through the Vice President's office. Kennedy refused. But while many of Kennedy's circle didn't like him Kennedy knew that he needed Johnson and gave him several important missions and policies to lead so that the southern wing of the party stayed on board. Their relationship was much more of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer than anything else.

Hubert Humphrey

Johnson selected Humphrey to be his Vice President and Humphrey immediately began serving by supporting each and everything Johnson proposed. Though he was anti-war Humphrey saw his responsibility to back his President even in the face of the liberal wing of the party that all but abandoned him for doing so. When Johnson announced that he would not run for re-election in 1968 Humphrey announced that he would run for President. And though he eventually won the nomination the 1968 Democratic convention was a disaster and Humphrey would not win the election.

Spiro Agnew

A moderate in the party he was seen as the perfect balance to Richard Nixon. And when they won the election Agnew ended up becoming the attack dog for the administration. That is, when he wasn't lining his own pockets. The rising talk of scandal surrounding Agnew destroyed the relationship he had with Nixon. In 1973 Agnew was forced to resign the office facing charges of corruption. When asked why Nixon kept him on the ticket when he wanted to get rid of him to begin with Nixon replied that no assassin in their right mind would shot Nixon if Agnew was next in line.

Gerald Ford

The first Vice President to take office under the 25th Amendment, the party in Congress basically demanded that Nixon accept Ford which he did. Ford was known in Congress as a good friend to almost everyone with a good temperment and a respect in every corner of the building. In the midst of Watergate, Ford was seen as a calming addition to the executive branch. But it was only going to be for a short time as President Nixon was forced to resign making Ford the President shortly thereafter.

Nelson Rockerfeller

Having rose to the office of Presiden through resignation, Ford then needed a Vice President. The names at the top of the list were Rockerfeller, George HW Bush, and Donald Rumsfeld. Ford ultimately selected Rockerfeller thinking that he gave them the best chance to win in 1976 as Rockerfeller had a broad base of support. Ford promised him that if he accepted the office he would be given more power than any prior Vice President. However once in office Ford's Chief of Staff had no intention of letting it happen. He was basically shut out of the White House for the rest of the term though Ford continued to try to use him when he could to keep the peace.

Walter Mondale

No Vice President was more important to a President nor closer to a President than Mondale was to Carter. Carter used him extensively and the two worked together on almost every major policy and program that Carter dealt with while President. The two were also very close friends and remain so to this day. The nature of the office changed with Mondale and Vice Presidents that followed have had more influence and power in their administrations based upon the work he did while in the office.

George HW Bush

Reagans primary opponent for the nomination he was chosen for the ticket to bring the party together for Reagan. Initially after winning Bush kept a very low profile and assumed the duties of his office believing that his job was to serve the President in the best way possible. When Reagan was shot, Bush handled the affair with a dignity and class, always making sure that everyone knew that Ronald Reagan was President that he earned the respect of Reagan for the rest of their time in office. Once Reagan returned to full duty he established weekly strategy meetings in the Oval Office with Bush that continued throughout both terms.

Dan Quayle

Bush chose Quayle for a youthful image in the White House that Bush lacked and was attacked for in the election season. It turned out to be a disaster of a pick. Bush tried to get Quayle into the public eye as much as possible to continue that youthful appearance to the public but Quayle botched almost every single appearance and speech he gave right down to incorrectly spelling potato... potatoe..... poteto.... whatever. It's a hard word. When Bush was up for re-election the party leaders wanted Bush to drop Quayle but he survived the move only to lose the election.

Al Gore

Ever the great politician, after Clinton won the election he sat down with Gore and their respective advisors and the two came up with a written agreement detailing the role that Gore would play in the administration. It was a brilliant move that gave Gore the most power any Vice President ever had in office and the two worked well together for the entire term. But as the scandals of the second term started hitting Clinton Gore started to distance himself from him. When he ran for President in 2000 he did his best to distance himself completely from Clinton and many still think it cost him the election.

Richard Cheney

Placed in charge of the Vice Preisdent seach committe for Bush, Bush surprised many of his closest advisors when he asked Cheney to be the nominee. He was a close advisor to Bush for both terms. Many believe he was the man in charge for much of the foreign policy decisions. And the tinfoil hat stories are endless. Cheney continued the advances of the office that Gore had under Clinton and was an important part of the administration.

Joseph Biden

By every indication Biden has been a massively important part of the administration, though the true nature of that importance is behind the scenes where he works with the President's team of advisors and balances the different opinions of each one of them. There is no other indication that he is anything but a truly close advisor to the President though it is certain that stories will leak in the coming years defining his role exactly. Currently debating running for President himself, Biden has been a long time public servant.

It's an interesting office, the Vice President of the United States. One heartbeat away from total global power, but only until recently was the office really of any importance. The outliers are few and far between. The odds tell us that for the most part, if you are the Vice President, you have a decent chance to die while in office, become estranged from your President, put yourself in a position to say and do stupid things and generally use up your own personal political capital for someone else. But the last quarter century has seen a change in the office. The Vice President now is an important advisor to the President and can be the person that bumps the ticket over the top or the anchor that drowns it in an Alaskian lake. The next Vice President of the United States is sore to be someone that wants to be President themselves one day and so whoever it is, they will have 4-8 years at least to do their best to be an advisor to the President while at the same time work to keep their own base of support going. Good luck.

 
53. Steven Spielberg

I dream for a living.

Steven Spielberg's dreams have had more of an impact on American culture than any other film director or creator (with one possible exception whom I will get to later on the list.) Rather than bore anyone with a short bio, let's cut right to the chase. Here are the incredible movies he directed:

Jaws

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

Raiders of the Lost Ark

E.T. The Extra Terrestrial

Schindler's List

Saving Private Ryan

Here are the very very good movies he directed:

Duel

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

The Color Purple

Empire of the Sun

Jurassic Park

Amistad

Munich

Lincoln

Here are the pretty good movies he directed:

The Sugarland Express

Always

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

Hook

The Lost World: Jurassic Park

War Horse

If I didn't mention a movie here, it's because, well, it wasn't very good. There are a few flops in Mr. Spielberg's long career, and it's best to just pretend they never happened. That's easy to do given the amazing list I just provided. The best news is he's only 68 and has several movies in the pipeline; the dreams are going to continue.

Up next: the Chairman of the Board...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
1988

The GOP needed a new leader now that Reagan was done. VP Bush was the heir apparant but Senatore Robert Dole and Pat Robertson ran as well. And so did New York Congressman Jack Kemp. When Bush lost the first primary coming in thrid to Dole and Robertson the party looked like it could be a mess. Bush had to fight the public perception of being wimpy and he did, reinvigorating his campaign, winning New Hampshire and then capturing Super Tuesday. Bush would go on to take the nomination and run on the successes of the Reagan years. The Democrats nominted liberal Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis. The GOP went after the liberal opponent on every issue famously claiming he would be soft on crime with the Willy Horton ads. The GOP's only problem was VP nominee Dan Quayle who was a problem from the start and who was destroyed by Lloyd Bentsen in the VP debate. But it didn't matter. The success of the Reagan years carried Bush to victory and claimed 426 electors to Dukakis' 111. It appeared that Bush would be able to serve his own 8 years giving the support he had to start.
A good read Yankee...thanks for the effort.

One item that you omitted from the 1984 and 1988 Democratic nominations was the rise and fall of Gary Hart. A senator from Colorado, Hart was the surprise of the 1984 nomination cycle, coming out of nowhere to challenge Mondale. And it looked like he would be a shoo in for the Democratic nomination in 1988 (there were really no other strong contenders), where he was poised to capitalize on the youth generation and the problems in the Republican party with Reagan and Bush both caught up in the Iran Contra scandal. But before he could really get rolling in the election process, he got caught up in a tabloid affair with a model and in the backlash, suspended his campaign. Hart tried to get back into the race late, but it was too late and the bland Dukakis had already established as the frontrunner.

Rather ironic that Hart was kind of Bill Clinton a decade before Bill Clinton. And after Bill Clinton (and probably more importantly, the rise of tabloid media journalism), having an affair is not such a career killer as it was in 1987.

 
53. Steven Spielberg

I dream for a living.

Steven Spielberg's dreams have had more of an impact on American culture than any other film director or creator (with one possible exception whom I will get to later on the list.) Rather than bore anyone with a short bio, let's cut right to the chase. Here are the incredible movies he directed:

Jaws

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

Raiders of the Lost Ark

E.T. The Extra Terrestrial

Schindler's List

Saving Private Ryan

Here are the very very good movies he directed:

Duel

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

The Color Purple

Empire of the Sun

Jurassic Park

Amistad

Munich

Lincoln

Here are the pretty good movies he directed:

The Sugarland Express

Always

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

Hook

The Lost World: Jurassic Park

War Horse

If I didn't mention a movie here, it's because, well, it wasn't very good. There are a few flops in Mr. Spielberg's long career, and it's best to just pretend they never happened. That's easy to do given the amazing list I just provided. The best news is he's only 68 and has several movies in the pipeline; the dreams are going to continue.

Up next: the Chairman of the Board...
Criminally underrating the Last Crusade.

 
52. Frank Sinatra

Alcohol may be man's worst enemy, but the Bible says love your enemy.

The founding member of the Rat Pack was America's first musical superstar. He first emerged to the public during World War II as a teen idol- and with all apologies to Rudy Vallee, Sinatra was probably our first great teen idol, because the words "teen" and "teenager" didn't exist until the 1940s. Part of the reason for this is that when mass communication really took off, beginning in the Great Depression, youngsters (the term used for boys and girls between 11-18) had no spending power. Only during the prosperous war years and afterwards did businessmen realize that there was new marketplace, a vast "leisure class" made up of teenagers with cash to spend, and that girls spent more of it than boys. This has been true ever since, and it has completely dominated American culture from about 1942 to the present year. Frank Sinatra was the first, and one of the greatest, benefactors of that new marketplace.

Frank was thin, a 100 pound weakling, and it's likely that despite his talents he wouldn't have become huge except for the fact that all the men were overseas fighting the war. He was their replacement, causing young girls all over to scream and faint (the Bobby Soxers) long before Elvis or the Beatles. Soldiers hated his guts. In order to sing "sexier", Frank also was one of the first progenitors, along with Benny Goodman, of another phenomenon we have witnessed in American and western music: a white guy basically stealing and popularizing innovative black music. In Sinatra's case it was Billie Holiday, who jazz fans loved but most of America had never heard of.

Despite his amazing fame, Frank's early records are kind of lackluster in most people's opinion and they certainly don't get much attention today. Sinatra went quickly into Hollywood, married Ava Gardner, and became one of the first performers to make Las Vegas popular. It was only after all of this, during the mid to late 1950s, when Sinatra was considered a has-been and rock and roll was taking off, did he decide to get serious for the first time about his singling skills. Teaming up with the legendary arranger Nelson Riddle, Sinatra recorded a number of legendary albums, including Songs For Swingin Lovers. And THIS is the Sinatra we've all heard ever since, one of the greatest voices in the history of popular music. Hold on...

OK, um, that was a call from a lawyer based in New York. He only has one client, whom he wouldn't name over the phone, except to say that his client was a very important man, who is a "personal friend" of the Sinatra family, and is distressed that I didn't place Frank in the top 25. He says he considers this a sign of disrespect. And he asked me politely to reconsider, that his client would consider that a great service, and I could come to call on him if I needed any favors in the future. On the other hand, if I turned this request down, his client would be saddened and displeased. :unsure:

Up next: Born in China, he was one of the most influential men of the 20th century...

 
58. Robert E. Lee

It is well that war is so terrible...otherwise we might grow too fond of it.

Robert E. Lee was a military genius, responsible for the great Confederate victories during the Seven Days Campaign, Fredericksburg, and Chanchellorsville. These victories prolonged the American Civil War by about 2 years. Lee is also responsible for saving the Army of Northern Virginia from the strategic defeat at Antietam, and for creating a stalemate situation after Gettysburg which led to bloody seiges (St. Petersburg, Cold Mountain, the Wilderness) which also prolonged the war and predicted the bloody battles of World War I, in which, until the tank was finally created, static defenses were extremely hard to penetrate. It should be noted that, as James B. MacPherson points out, had Lee not won these victories and stalemates, the Confederacy would have been destroyed much earlier, likely in 1862, and the South would have been far better off- no starvation, Sherman's march, or destruction of their economic system. Probably slavery would have survived for the time being with a slower, more peaceful emancipatiion process.

But during the most pivotal battle of the eastern war, Gettysburg, Robert E. Lee was more responsible than any other man for the Confederate defeat, by insisting upon Pickett's charge against all odds. Because Lee is so important to the Southern "Lost Cause" movement, this great error in judgment, somewhat analogous to Napoleon's failure in Moscow and Hitler's at Stalingrad, often gets overlooked. Robert E. Lee was a soft-spoken, chivalrous gentleman, the essence of the "noble southerner", and perhaps for this reason, he is honored by the Lost Cause as the greatest example of the antebellum South, over Jefferson Davis and Stonewall Jackson and every other Confederate hero. Therefore it's very important that Lee did no wrong during the war; thus Gettysburg is typically blamed on Longstreet, or Ebell, or other subordinates. Lee blamed himself, however. He knew it was a great gamble,

In making this list I considered several Confederate figures: as argued previously in this thread, I do not regard them as traitors, and many were great Americans. Ultimately, I ended up with two: Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee, mainy because they were such brilliant military minds. I thought long and hard about Jefferson Davis because of what he represented, but ultimately he was a mediocre man and his actions as President did not contribute greatly to the Confederate caiuse. Lee both exemplified and prolonged that cause; thus he is it's most important figure.

Next up: he rose from the depths of slavery to become one of America's greatest inventors...
load of crap

i look forward to seeing how high you put General Cornwallis and Benedict Arnold

 
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)

Public Acumen/Persuasion

Not gonna lie. In putting together these final guys I'm trying to figure out where all the attacks are going to come from which is a first. And is the exact problem with these guys. It's still too soon. But I'll jump off that box and get to it. Ronald Reagan is going to get highest marks here. He isn’t getting them in every category though, as the almost deity status he is given in our presidential discussions sometimes forgets facts and context. But when it comes to this category he is among the elites. Reagan’s ability to communicate to the American people and his political acumen changed the nation in many ways. The effects of his presidency and his legacy – good and bad – are still being felt today. But with a background in acting and a place in the political discussion for 25 years prior to becoming President, Reagan harnessed something that was massively powerful and persuasive.

War & Crisis

The AIDS crisis is something that many hit him for. By 1985 the CDC reports that 4,000 people died from the disease and by 1989 they reported 46,000 deaths. The initial failure to attack the virus is something that Reagan might deserve a hit for, but it shouldn’t be a massive hit. Reagan did not understand the virus and its magnitude at all. His White House doctor has written that Reagan saw the initial reports as something like the measles – an outbreak that would go away like any other. But in July 1985 Reagan changed course massively because of the death of his friend Rock Hudson. Reagan’s own advisors had initially informed him that Hudson was dying of cancer. Reagan learned it was AIDS like everyone else did – from the breaking television report about the actor. By September, Reagan gave a press conference where he said AIDS was the administration’s top health issue to deal with. The report he ordered from his surgeon general wasn’t issued though until a year later. Reagan did support a massive increase in federal funding to deal with the virus, supporting his HHS secretary’s calls for more government action. But Reagan, the GOP and his own advisors had no clear cut agenda or way to handle the disease and it wasn’t until 1987 that Reagan spoke against the ignorance of the disease. Critics called it way too little and way too late. Many feel that had he used his power earlier the crisis in the 80’s would have been averted. It’s probably true given Reagan’s ability to persuade and lead.

Reagan and much of his advisors believed that the US had an interest in Lebanon. In August, 1982, when Menachim Began ordered the bombing of Lebanon’s capital Reagan, who was pro-Israel, confronted him and told him that Israel had gone too far. Balancing the hawks and the diplomats, Reagan ordered 800 troops into Lebanon tasked with a peacekeeping mission and maintain a cease fire. When the warring factions of Israel and the PLO withdrew, Reagan ordered the troops to leave, but as soon as they did violence erupted again. Hezbollah began attacking American troops and in 1983 the Marines barracks was bombed killing 250 American servicemen. Seeing Lebanon as a place where a small US force would never serve a purpose, Reagan chose to remove the troops from harms way and while trying to cover that the removal was part of a bigger plan, he never again sent troops to the region.

By December of 1983, terrorism was a word that everyone would learn. The U.S. Embassy in Kuwait was bombed, hijackers took a Kuwaiti airline and killed American citizens, and Hezbollah took another plane in 1985 and killed more Americans. When terrorists took American hostages in Lebanon in late 1985 Reagan began a series of moves that resulted in Libyan involvement. Over the next several months terrorist attacks against American interests and citizens in the world escalated with what the administration ultimately declared was direct involvement from Libya. When the CIA and European agencies finally found a direct link, Reagan ordered the bombing of Libya. Quadaffi survived the bombing but it did slow down Libyan actions. But by 1988, terrorists connected to Libya destroyed PanAm flight 103.

Reagan also put himself in the middle of what has become the Iran-Contra affair. The scandal was truly the first time that the public simply did not believe Reagan and it forced him to issue an apology to the American people where he also tried to hedge a little on his intentions. The scandal was a black mark on Reagan’s term and it also hurt his successor, President Bush, as well. But the public largely eventually forgave the incident. But Reagan either mismanaged his administration or was simply naïve in an important geopolitical action that had dire results. Iran Contra should continue to be a black mark on his historic legacy.

Economy

Contrary to the GOP 30 second sound biters in today’s media and politics, Reagan has a mixed record here. His tax cuts and the attendant actions by the Federal Reserve which Reagan backed to tighten interest rates eventually led to massive economic growth. But at the same time the deficit, the national debt and the trade deficit grew exponentially. Reagan supporters lay the blame for that on Congress for not cutting spending as Reagan requested, but Reagan was the President and did little to react to what Congress did. Reagan’s support of the Federal Reserve can be connected to the economic boom in the 90’s that President Clinton enjoyed, but the underlying debt and deficit simply do not go away as a result. The economy was certainly better when Reagan left office as compared to when he left, so he gets good grades. But Reagan’s ultimate economic legacy is not perfect. In fact, it created underlying assumptions that have been a problem in future years as politicians play games with the economy.

Foreign Policy

However, a massive chunk of that extra spending was Reagan’s pet cause – the military buildup to confront the Soviet Union. The entirety of Reagan’s ultimate foreign policy was to stop the policy of détente with Russia and instead push them to collapse and/or defeat one way or the other. Those who wish to re-write history in this current era see the continued deity status that Reagan gets and hit back by saying that he had little to do with the eventual fall of the Soviet Union. But that isn’t fair, nor frankly true. Prime Minister Thatcher stated that Reagan’s ability to change the perception of the battle between east and west and to characterize communism as an evil against the good of the west was a fundamental shift in perception. And that perception became reality. Reagan knew that a buildup of defense spending would force the Kremlin to spend money they didn’t have based on an economy that wasn’t fundamentally sound. Historians are still ultimately mixed about the cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Some will give Reagan all the credit. Some with give the credit to Mikhael Gorbechev for understanding the realities of his nation at the time. Some will say that it was inevitable given their economic realities. Some say that their entry into Afghanistan is what ultimately bankrupted them and not Reagan and his military buildup. The truth is most likely a combination of everything.

But the central figure is still Reagan. He isn’t solely responsible for the end of the Soviet Union anymore than Abraham Lincoln is solely responsible for the victory in the Civil War. There are always a myriad of factors. But like Lincoln, Reagan was able to take what seems like a simple plan/outlook/determination and use it to direct the overall story and legacy of the moment. Reagan doesn’t get a 10 in foreign policy – his failures to truly understand what the rise of terrorism would mean to the world are no small part of reducing him from that number – but he gets good marks. By the end of Reagan’s term the movement towards more free markets policies in the world and more democratic institutions was on the rise. But as we know a lot of it was short lived or ended up creating more problems that we are still dealing with.

Executive Skills/Congress

Reagan gets top marks here. One of his better abilities was to work with the Democratic Congress throughout his time in office. His political ability played no small part here for sure.

Justice/Rights

Reagan should have been better here based on his outlook on government and its nature. HE alienated the black community with his support of Bob Jones University. He did, though, appoint the first female Supreme Court Justice. Biographers will and have written that Reagan detested bigotry as it related to race and sex but he wasn’t able to be seen as the champion of that ideal as he may have been seen when he was President of the Screen Actors guild and fought for better results for minorities in the field. He gets hit for objecting to sanctions against South Africa but he is also on record as saying he opposed them because they would hurt the poorest people in South Africa who were racial minorities. Frankly, Reagan’s talks and writing on sanctions and apartheid is probably a good basis for President’s that followed him to keep in mind. Because Reagan was right that they do ultimately hurt the very people you are trying to help.

But Reagan is usually defined and therefore remembered here for Bob Jones and unfortunately stupid remarks he made about Martin Luther King, Jr. The truth is must more complex. And the attack he continued against the Soviet Union and the resulting end to communist rule over Eastern Europe should be considered a plus here.

Context

Reagan entered the White House when the American people needed to feel better about themselves and their nation. This is not a new statement. It’s the truth. But there is more. Carter wasn’t the greatest messenger for a hard message and Reagan had a talent that Carter didn’t have. But the context between Carter and Reagan is eerily similar to that of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Much of the success of Jefferson’s time in office is attributable to Adams’ policies that Jefferson attacked. Reagan similarly enjoys the benefit of Carter’s policies that he attacked as it relates to the Federal Reserve and interest rates. But like Jefferson, there is just something more about Reagan.

Reagan’s political movement changed American politics. His presence is still felt today. The men that are running for office for the GOP will fall over themselves to quote Reagan whenever they can. He is still revered by many. But like any leader he is also reviled by many. If the truth of the Cold War is that Russia was going to eventually fall then Reagan was the perfect man for the times as he pushed them over the cliff they were too close to faster than had they just kept standing there on their own. Democratic principals and free markets theories grew under his watch. But there are dire consequences for that mentioned above and seen all too often now in our foreign policy. And the scandals of the Reagan era, whether his directly or not, call back to the Watergate feeling of Washington and the belief that far too many Presidents and their administrations act as if they are above the law. Reagan will ultimately get good marks here, but not perfect the way that far too many GOPers seem to want to believe.

Conclusion

On persuasion Reagan will get a 10 but it’s his only perfect score. On crisis he gets a 7, on economy he gets a 8, foreign policy 7, Congress 9, civil rights 7, context 8. 56 total points for Reagan. He is not a 60 point guy the way Lincoln and Washington are but is in the next grouping of the greater Presidents. He wasn’t perfect like many try to argue but he also wasn’t the worst criminal that some want to argue either. Reagan’s legacy has seemed to evolve into a tug of war between people that love him too much and people that hate him too much and both sides pushing the other to more and more extremes just to win the argument over the other. That legacy is the definition of what much of our politics has become today. A similar reality defines Bill Clinton and even moreso George W. Bush. And it will certainly define Barack Obama. As the growth and explosion of information media takes politics to a whole new level Reagan is probably just on the outside of the last guy in that office to not have to deal with it all that much while he was in office. By the end of Bush’s term he was being attacked for not knowing what the grocery price scanner was and unable to use the power of television the way Clinton could.

 
George HW Bush (1989-1992)

Public Acumen/Persuasion

Bush fought the attack constantly that he was a weak old guy that wasn’t connected to the American people. He is one of the more important figures in our political history and pretty close to a great man. His public perception has been increased tenfold since he’s been out of office though. And as the 80’s turned into the 90’s, Bush’s inability to connect to the American people in the face of a young fresh face in politics was a weakness that cost him re-election.

War & Crisis

The first Persian Gulf war in 1990 exploded a new era of combat in the world. When Iraq invaded Kuwait President Bush managed to get what amounted to a joint declaration against the action by the United States, Great Britain and Russia almost simultaneously. Taking that unprecedented unification Bush worked with the United Nations to form a coalition of international leaders against the actions of Iraq that included Arab nations and leaders as well. Using his vast network of friendships the world over President Bush personally called numerous world leaders to put a plan in place to deal with Iraq. When the last attempts at diplomacy failed with Iraq, Bush authorized Operation Desert Storm in January, 1991. In less than two months, American led forces forced a cease fire from Iraq. The international cooperation in handling the crisis was the basis of Bush’s foreign policy and has been the undercurrent for much of America’s foreign policy since.

Economy

Reagan’s rising deficit’s crashed head first into Bush’s pledge of no new taxes. By 1990 he publically stated that raising taxes would be necessary to close the budget gap as he continued to work with Congress. By the end of the year, after a short government shutdown when Bush vetoed Congress’ spending plan, he agreed to a plan with Democratic leaders that included spending cuts and higher taxes. The GOP felt betrayed by Bush going back on his word and it would cost him when he ran again. But it helped to keep the economy on track into the 90’s and some pretty solid to great years.

Bush also had to bailout the savings and loan industry with an agreement with a Democratic congress that overshadowed the budget fights he was having the betrayal felt by the right wing of the party. Still, the economy was on solid footing though it wasn’t spectacular as 1992’s election season approached.

Foreign Policy

With international agreement working in Iraq, Bush led the charge for a New World Order where former eastern and western nations that never cooperated in the cold war would now work together for the good of all nations. With the fall of the Soviet Union and a power vacuum in much of the old communist areas, Bush’s plan was bold. But it wasn’t without critics or problems. In Madrid, the United States led a coalition of Spain and Russia and other countries to tackle the middle east peace process. It didn’t result in a policy or a success but it laid the framework for more international cooperation among old rivals. In Somalia, Bush sent troops to help the process in the old soviet controlled country but no success was achieved by the time he left office. Overall, though, the legacy of Bush’s foreign policy was an increased desire for American foreign policy to seek agreement with other nations, and for the use of military force to be seen as an international action and not a solely American action.

Executive Skills/Congress

Bush gave his support to the American with Disabilities Act and got it passed early in his term. He also signed the Clean Air Act of 1990 which included sweeping changed in environmental policy not truly tackled since Nixon was in office. He worked well with Congress though he did force the shutdown of the government over the budget battles of 1990. But in the end he was able to deal and compromise and work with and lead the government.

Justice/Rights

Bush wasn’t awful here though he wasn’t great. He vetoed the 1990 Civil Rights Act but signed the 1991 Act. He passed the ADA. He wouldn’t defund the NEA when it came under fire for fearing what that would mean for censorship arguments. But then called for a Constitutional Amendment to ban the burning of the American flag. Bush also had a personal aide in the White House that was gay and when Bush found out about it he was perplexed that anyone thought he would do anything but continue to work and support his friend. So while not perfect here, he wasn’t James Buchanan.

Context

Having to follow Ronald Reagan was going to be hard. But Bush was a solid to very good President. The perception of the man has grown over the years since he left office with more and more people showing a respect for him that if he had in 1992 he might have won the election. But in the end history seems to tell us that when you follow one of the top level guys (Adams after Washington) (Johnson after Lincoln) (Taft after Teddy) (Truman after FDR) you have a very very hard road to travel.

Conclusion

On persuasion Bush gets a 5, on crisis he gets a 7, on economy 7, foreign policy 8, congress 6, civil rights 7 and context 5. Bush’s ultimate failure was that his political philosophy was one of slow progress and temperance against fast moving change. That basic stance got blurred when the Soviet Union fell and Germany unified so quickly and the world really never stopped spinning as fast as it was going. By the time that the American people met Bill Clinton, George Herbert Walker Bush was seen as a connection to a time that should be moved on from. But his 45 points ultimately put him in a class of the solid upper tier guys that did the job well and were fairly honorable men and good leaders whom the nation is most likely better off for having. Unless you are Bill Clinton circa 1992. Then, Bush was just an old white guy in the way of change.

 
Bill Clinton (1993-2000)

Public Acumen/Persuasion

You’d think for a guy so good at what he did that the women he was connected to would be 10’s themselves, no? I mean, for as much as Clinton gets top marks for his political prowess, his bedding of 4-6’s leaves you wondering just what the heck was going on with this guy sometimes. Yeah, I said it – I want my President’s to get Marilyn Monroe, not Monica Lewinsky. Eh, whatever. Bill Clinton get a 10 in this category fairly easily. The small state governor who had more sex scandals than a playboy mansion overnight guest is still beloved by many and remembered fondly. He deserves it many respects but there are some weaknesses down below.

War & Crisis

Didn’t start off great with Somalia, Haiti and Rwanda that’s for sure. But Clinton managed to redirect his foreign policy team and by the time of Kosovo and Bosnia, Clinton’s plans and leadership along with his work on an international coalition to attack the violence did work. And against critics Clinton continued to support Russian President Yeltsin even in the face of obvious corruption to ensure a continued working relationship with the nation and the security of the Russian nuclear stockpile.

But the main crisis that Clinton dealt with Whitewater, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky and eventually impeachment. Critics and conspiracy theorists of the Clintons will regale you with stories about how the Clintons got their perch of power in a long standing game of murder, corruption, blackhat level actions against political rivals and every other horrible under the sun. The real truth of the matter at this point though (subject to change if anything is ever truly found in the future beyond what we know now) is that in the face of these scandals a-many, and the constant PR spin that Clinton had to use and deal with to get through all of these issues, is the simple fact that he was re-elected in a large win, served all eight years, is still pretty beloved by many and put on a pedestal in the face of the guy that followed him, and to this day is seen as an elder statesman. So while he dealt with these crisis’ he came out on top.

Economy

Clinton’s economy is pretty spectacular. In fact in 1992 had you said what it was going to be you would have been institutionalized. Surpluses, economic growth and low inflation were the words of the day. There are chinks in the armor though. Clinton’s repeal of the Glass Steagal act would join a few other factors that eventually led to the crash of the American economy in 2007. So how do you score that? We’ll see.

Foreign Policy

Clinton continued Bush’s basic policy here but made it his own after the initial failings of his first few months. He continued to work with Russia, and grew the ideal that American leadership in foreign affairs was important but that it should focus on economic agreements and open trade, peacekeeping and international diplomacy. All good things. You could also argue that Clinton failed to understand the rise of yet another growing danger to America involving terrorism and the warning signs of the attack on the USS Cole, the Khobar Towers bombing, the US Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzinia, and the World Trade Center bombings. Collectively these rising attacks and warnings weren’t acted on in a way that ended the danger to the United States as we know. In as early as 1995 Congress was briefed on the involvement of Osama Bin Laden in terrorist activities.

Though, in reality, no matter the intelligence and growing concerns, you can legitimately ask just how in the heck were you really supposed to know what was in store. Anti-Clinton republicans will attack him forever for his failures to address terrorism and lay the blame for 9/11 at his feet just as much as Bush’s, if blame is even the right word. But that ignores American foreign policy that created Bin Laden, from Truman to Bush. In the end, Clinton’s foreign policy successes were a continuation of the policies began under the first President Bush and when added to Clinton’s political acumen, were successful more than being abject failures.

Executive Skills/Congress

Clinton lost the Congress in 1994 which would make you think that he gets a 1 here. Except that in masterful Clinton style, he still managed to “end welfare as we know it,” pass NAFTA, and lead the economy. His entry into national health care was a disaster for sure though. And of course, when the GOP had had enough of Bill Clinton and his sexual escapades and lying under oath in a deposition they moved to impeach him. Of all the President’s that truly faced or were subject to true impeachment talk, Clinton is the only way that seems to have moved on almost scot-free. Another remarkable endorsement of his political acumen.

Justice/Rights

Don’t ask don’t tell isn’t exactly a rousing civil rights victory but it was something. But he was the first President to appoint openly gay people in positions in government, he supported affirmative action policies, he tasked the Department of Justice to tackle the growing problem of racial profiling, he fought for the DBE Act to help women and minority owned businesses, and various others. Overall, Clinton’s record on civil rights is good – and in an office where there were slave holders you certainly can say he was one of the better ones.

Context

It’s still being written. Clinton managed to change the Democratic party and with it blunted the growth of the Reagan revolution in politics, returning middle class whites to the democratic party. The party that is in place today is just as much his as any others. He benefited from Bush’s economic compromise in 1992 just as much as Reagan benefited from Carter’s. But he lost Congress and his Vice President couldn’t win the office for himself, in many ways because of the scandals that rocked the administration. But Clinton could connect. In more ways than one. Last sex joke. As the 90’s saw another cultural change in the country with the enormous explosion of the internet Clinton was the President for the times though. A new face with a new sense of political party, with the ability to change when political realities forced it, able to make international relationships that were valuable to the United States and he was a below average sax player (by the way, Nixon was a phenomenal piano player. Forgot to mention that for him). Clinton gets solid grades here.

Conclusion

It’s becoming harder and harder to grade these guys and Clinton’s story isn’t done yet. But for now, on persuasion he gets a 10, on crisis he gets a 6, on economy he gets a 8, on foreign policy he gets a 7, congress a 5, civil rights 8 and context 6. 50 total points for Bill Clinton. He should be higher. He had the political ability to be higher and be remembered as truly one of the greats ever. Maybe he is in 40 years. But the scandals and personal weaknesses detract from what could have been a truly inspiring lasting legacy. He had Reagan’s political ability and Eisenhower’s economy. He ends up being near those guys as a result by and large, but he could have been better. I wonder if that eats at him at all. Maybe not. Still, in the end, Clinton is one of those Presidents that you think probably could have won a third term if he was able to run for it. All hell broke loose in his final November in office though.

 
I think people make way too much of Reagan and the AIDS crisis. I think your brief summary is fair. I doubt that any President would have reacted much differently.

 
My next pick for greatest American, as per my clue, is a guy born in China and who was arguably one of the 3-4 most influential Americans of the 20th century. I think that's a pretty good trivia question. Any guesses?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top