Posted on Leave a comment

Sitting Presidents Challenged from Within

For this week’s blog, I think I have another fun topic.  I will be looking at Presidents that faced serious challenges to their party’s presidential nomination from within their party.  This only happened three times in the twentieth century.  Sorry John Ashbrooke in 1972 against Richard Nixon, but, I don’t consider your challenge serious.  Same with Pat Buchanan’s challenge of George H. W. Bush in 1992.  And, sorry Eugene McCarthy in 1968, but, Lyndon Johnson dropped out, before your challenge could be considered serious.  William Taft had Teddy Roosevelt.  Gerald Ford had Ronald Reagan.  Jimmy Carter had Ted Kennedy.

Teddy Roosevelt decided not to see another term as president in 1908.  His hand picked successor was William Taft.  Taft won the election of 1908.  Roosevelt’s expectation was that Taft would carry on the policies that he has espoused.  After 4 years, Roosevelt was not happy with the record that Taft had built for himself.  He chose to challenge him for he Republican party presidential nomination that year.  Taft held onto the nomination.  This wasn’t good enough for Roosevelt, so, he decided to run as a third party candidate.  In the end, Taft lost the presidency to Woodrow Wilson, finishing third behind both Wilson and Roosevelt.  The challenge hurt him.  The entry of a third party candidate killed him.

Gerald Ford had never gone through a primary.  He had never been vetted for national office by the public, his party or the media.  He was vetted by the Nixon administration and by congress.  He became Vice-President after the resignation of Spiro Agnew.  He became President after the resignation of Richard Nixon.  In 1976, he decided that he would seek a full mandate under his own name.   For Gerald Ford items CLICK HERE!  However, someone else wanted the job.  Former California Governor decided that he was better suited to lead the United States of America through those difficult times.  Early on, Ford won primary after primary.  The Reagan campaign seemed over before a race really began.  Suddenly, Reagan started winning primaries.  The two candidates would disagree over key policy points.  Going into the convention, the two were neck and neck.  After the votes were counted, they remained close, but, Ford prevailed.  However, Reagan would have more followers than ever before.  The battle cost Ford.  In the end, the debate he was forced to engage in probably cost him the presidency (that, and the Nixon pardon).

Jimmy Carter won a hard fought battle for his party’s presidential nomination in 1976.  He emerged stronger for the fight and won the presidency against a weakened Gerald Ford.  His presidency saw, as he put it, a malaise over the nation.  The economy was sluggish.  Oil prices were rising, when it was available.  The Soviets invaded Afghanistan and Iran took American Embassy staff hostage.  Many a crises rose.  Most beyond his direct control.  He could do little but watch.  For Jimmy Carter items CLICK HERE!  Enter a candidate with the most famous name in the Democratic party.  Ted Kennedy would challenge Cater for his party’s presidential nomination.  Kennedy called for even more government intervention.  Kennedy spoke to the fears of the nation and the party.  For Ted Kennedy items CLICK HERE!Carter ultimately won the race for the nomination, but not before feeling Kennedy’s sting.  He was badly weakened going into the general election.  He lost the presidency to Ronald Reagan.

In each instance, the major challenge cost the person their job.  In the case of the latter two, Reagan and Kennedy, the challengers based the opposition on appealing to their party’s base; Reagan from the right, Kennedy from left.  The lessons have not been lost.  How often do we hear about candidates appealing to their base during primary season only to move to the centre for the general election?  Challenges can be healthy and welcome.  However, they hurt the incumbent and cost them their jobs.

What do you think?  Share your comments below.

Posted on Leave a comment

20th Century One Term Presidents – Why They Failed to be Re-Elected

Back to a regular blog.  This week, I’m going to look at twentieth century one term U.S. Presidents.  For the purposes of this blog, a one term President is one who originally attained office in their own right and then lost their bid for re-election.  This precludes individuals that first rose to the office as a result of the passing or resignation of the sitting President (Teddy Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford).  This leaves us with only 4 20th century one-termers, William Taft, Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter and George Bush.  There is one common element that all four faced, and a second that 3 of the four faced.  Here is my analysis.

William Taft (1909 – 1913) – The United States faced a significant economic downturn in the early part of the 20th century.  As is usually the case, the person at the top got the blame.  Taft inherited an economy that was doing okay, but, watched, helplessly as it fell into recession.  He faced a second challenge.  Third party candidate Teddy Roosevelt decided that he wanted his old job back.  He ran as a third party candidate.  He did so well, that the incumbent president finished third in the popular vote.  Both lost to Woodrow Wilson.

Herbert Hoover (1929 – 1933) – In the first year of Hoover’s presidency, the stock market crashed.  Whether you subscribe to the numerous economists who suggest that the crash was a result of the coming depression or whether you subscribe to the J. K. Galbraith theory that the crash caused the depression, the fact is, the economy went into the tank and the Hoover government was helpless to stop it.  Try as he might, the depression came about.  His opponent in the 1932 election provided hope.  Hoover lost his bid for re-election to Franklin Roosevelt.  For Franklin Roosevelt items CLICK HERE!

Jimmy Carter (1977 – 1981) – Under Jimmy Carter’s watch, the U.S. economy fell into recession.  Instead of offering the hope that Franklin Roosevelt would offer, he criticized the very people he would need to be re-elected.  He complained of a “ma-laze  in the nation”.  He was, of course, correct.  But voters don’t want to be blamed for their problem; they want to be offered solutions.  For Jimmy Carter items CLICK HERE!  Add to the fact that a liberal Republican (yes, there used to be those), having lost his own party’s nomination, ran as an independent.  IL congressman John Anderson would garner some of the votes from the left, votes that would more likely have gone to Carter.  For John Anderson items CLICK HERE!  In the end, both would lose to Ronald Reagan.  For Ronald Reagan items CLICK HERE!

George H. W. Bush (1989 – 1993) – Bush’s election was, in itself, an oddity.  Usually, Vice-Presidents don’t get elected after an 8 year term in the office.  Bush, however, bucked that trend.  He led an allied coalition in the Gulf War.  He seemed unbeatable going into the 1992 election.  Events overtook him.  After breaking his “no new taxes” pledge, the economy went into recession.  For George H. W. Bush items CLICK HERE!  Enter a third party candidate that had prior ties to the Republican party, Ross Perot.  He challenged the president from the right.  He mocked his economic policies.  He won almost 20% of the vote.  For Ross Perot items CLICK HERE!  In the end, both would lose to a new generation of American.  Bill Clinton would beat them both.  For Bill Clinton item CLICK HERE!

My thesis should be obvious.  James Carville was right when he said, “it’s the economy, stupid”.  Presidents lose office when the economy turns against them.  In three cases, the faltering economy led to third party challenges.  In every case, the President was unable to hold onto office.

Do you agree?  Share your thoughts in the comment section.