By Edwin Cooney
What do you suppose compels Americans to elect any one person President of the United States of America? Well, according to the Constitution of the United States, we must -- hence, we do! So, let’s start from the very beginning and see what our motives are and what they might portend for 2016!
In 1788 and 1792, we elected General George Washington of Virginia. As for why Washington, the short answer is that the new nation didn’t collectively know anyone else. Ben Franklin was on his last crippled legs. John Adams, cranky and quirky as he was, probably was the best known across the nation other than Washington and Jefferson -- who wasn’t in the country in 1788. Jefferson was busy representing us in Paris, hanging out with Maria Cosway, another diplomat’s wife, and having one hell of a good time.
As for the election of John Adams in 1796, Adams was, after all, Washington’s Vice President so he had to almost automatically be the most qualified man available.
As for 1800, which would be labeled America’s second revolution (or the Revolution of 1800) because it was the first time we “threw the rascals out,” powerful men like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison (despite their political differences) said it was time we did just that. By Election Day 1800, Adams had successfully ended our quarrel with France so we didn’t need him anymore. Besides, he’d agreed to those awful Alien and Sedition Acts which made criticism of the president a punishable offense during an international crisis. Thus, in the name of civil liberties, that prickly old man had to go.
Meanwhile, Thomas Jefferson was a hell of a lawyer, writer, scientist, and strict constructionist of the Constitution. Hence, we elected him. Had Jefferson violated the Constitution by purchasing Louisiana from Napoleon Bonaparte, there would have been pure hell to pay. Americans might have even dumped him in 1804 for Aaron Burr, his ever wayward and unpredictable vice president! If we elected Jefferson to purchase Louisiana, history does not record it!
Skipping ahead to 1828, we elected Andrew Jackson because he was the greatest soldier since Washington. Jackson offered no political program except that he hated aristocratic elitists like John Quincy Adams, and wayward Indian tribes. Besides, old Quincy Adams was as pompous and irritable as his old man! Jackson was exciting and unpredictable and he knew how to handle the Indians. So, we elected him.
Surprisingly, we elected James Knox Polk in 1844 because he agreed to annex Texas no matter what Mexico thought and especially if it helped the cause of slavery. Polk’s ultimate political legacy was that he kept all of his major campaign promises. Still, he would leave office in 1849 exhausted and increasingly unpopular. Though he was only 53 the previous November 2nd, he would be dead by June of 1849.
Interestingly, the election of perhaps our greatest president, Abraham Lincoln, exacerbated rather than salved the crisis at hand. Had we elected Stephen A. Douglas (known as the “little giant” because he was only 5 feet 4 inches), the benign John Bell of Tennessee, or President James Buchanan’s feisty vice president John C. Breckinridge, also from Tennessee, there might have been still another compromise rather than secession throughout the spring of 1861. Because of who he was and how he conducted his office, Abraham Lincoln was the right choice. Or was he? Is war ever a good choice?
The election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt over the incumbent Herbert Hoover on the surface seems to be the most genuinely responsive presidential choice for the solving of a major national problem. However, although FDR promised during the campaign that he would do something about those who were speculating with “…other people’s money,” most Americans voted for him because his name wasn’t Herbert Clark Hoover.
Harry S Truman won in 1948 because he knew how to campaign better than his GOP opponent Thomas E. Dewey. Ike won over the far more eloquent and intellectual Adlai Stevenson because, like Washington, Jackson, Zachary Taylor and Ulysses S. Grant, he was a deserving war hero who could protect us should enemies “foreign or domestic” challenge us.
Jack Kennedy was far more exciting and glamorous than Richard Nixon who was glamor minus. Besides, Americans invariably value entertainment over “do nothing” boredom!
For that and other reasons, Ronald Reagan defeated the earnest incumbent Jimmy Carter in 1980. After all, Carter was originally elected primarily because he was a political outsider and immune to Washington’s ways. Hence, when Carter appeared to be less than competent, a trait he had promised the people to demonstrate on their behalf, it was time for him to go!
The election of President Barack Obama was a combination of a desire for change and the dawning of a new era of tolerance and cooperation in a country that was beginning to taste the bitter flavor of an oncoming recession. Thus, when during the presidential campaign his opponent John McCain appeared uncertain as to how to handle himself -- let alone the growing crisis -- the “black man” was in!
As for what it all means? We usually don’t elect a president because he (or perhaps she) proscribes a solution to a national or international problem. Seldom is there an overwhelming consensus on a specific solution to a domestic or foreign policy matter. Richard Nixon’s “secret plan” to end the war in Vietnam wasn’t the reason for his 1968 election over Hubert Humphrey. However, his reputation for having had sufficient foreign policy experience under President Eisenhower may have given him a decisive advantage over Humphrey in that otherwise too-close-to-call political campaign. Reagan, who promised to balance the budget which was a trillion dollars when Jimmy Carter left office, tripled it with worthwhile military expenditures. Thus, America may well be ready for — take a deep breath now — Donald J. Trump.
A look over the 17 GOP presidential candidates doesn’t indicate that any of them, especially Mr. Trump, offers compelling solutions to our healthcare needs, the dangers in the Middle East, issues concerning immigration or even how to secure Social Security for yet unborn retirees. What Trump seems to offer disillusioned voters is an opportunity to settle scores with the whole of our political establishment — especially the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Historically, politicians insist that they are really capable businessmen at heart. Of course, we have elected two pretty good businessmen during the 20th Century — Herbert Clark Hoover and James Earl Carter. Politicians are supposed to be bad for the country, but the best politician we ever elected saved more people’s homes, businesses and ultimately their country from the ravages of depression and war than any businessman president. As Casey Stengel used to say: “You can look it up!”
The Trump possibility could be as infectious as the 1992 boon was for (Henry) Ross Perot in view of the fact that he has yet to promise not to run as a third party candidate should the GOP snub him. (The late great comedian Will Rogers once observed that “…old men are contrary --- and rich old men is awfully contrary; they’ve had their own way so long…”)
Here’s something to ponder! If soldiers, businessmen, lawyers, and politicians aren’t worthy of election — who is?
Here’s another possibility and it may even be a likelihood in view of how so many Americans feel about today’s leaders and would-be leaders: perhaps nobody is worthy of our trust. If such is the case, perhaps we have lost the capacity to trust. If that’s the case, whose problem is that — ours, or those who dare to try to lead us? Is it possible that we’re just too good to be led by anybody?
If we’ve lost our capacity to trust or to believe in any leader, if we’re really and truly too good to be led, what matters about the whys of our past and what value is there in our future?
If that question doesn’t cause you to at least pause and consider it, then you and I should agree to never again discuss history, politics or tomorrow’s unknown treasures!
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY
No comments:
Post a Comment