Running A “Front Porch” Campaign: The Brilliance of Mark Hanna

Top 2. Mar 2, 2004 5:42 PM

» historygeek - Re: welcome back...

In response to message posted by Red:

Thanks Mary, it is nice to be back. I am glad to hear that you liked the article. I appreciate all of the help and encouragement.

-- posted by historygeek

Top 3. Mar 6, 2004 9:17 AM

» Brian Tubbs - Great article

I recall reading somewhere a while back that Hanna also basically extorted many western farmers to back Hanna by having Republican-controlled banks call in loans. If true, then McKinley's victory owes to corruption, to some extent.

Nevertheless, the 1900 election (once again, Bryan v. McKinley) was more decisive in favor of McKinley. Bryan's focus on imperialism didn't get much traction in the aftermath of the popular Spanish-American War.

-Brian

p.s. Wasn't Bryan a Presybertian? I seem to recall he served in its hierarchical assembly later on. I could be wrong, though. It's happened before. :-)

-- posted by Brian Tubbs

Top 4. Mar 7, 2004 5:45 AM

» Barbara Bell - Re: welcome back...

In response to message posted by Red:

Welcome back, Melanie! This was an excellent article and so timely! It reminds us that the American voter has always responded to good "packaging" and the Presidency is as much a commodity as McDonald's and cigarettes...

-- posted by Barbara Bell

Top 5. Mar 7, 2004 1:06 PM

» historygeek - Re: Great article

In response to message posted by BrianTubbs:

Oops! Brian you are correct. First article since returning to the Suite and I've already mucked it up! smile Yes Bryan was Presbyterian and not Baptist. I guess since I live in the South I think everyone is either Baptist or Methodist! smile Thanks for catching that for me and I have made the necessary changes.

You are also right about Hanna. He was very shrewd when it came to business and politics. You have to really feel for the farmers during this election. The Populists had picked up some steam in the election of 1894 and expected both parties to nominate conservative candidates leaving them as a protest party. However when the Democrats nominated Bryan and endorsed a silver platform the Populists had no choice but to endorse him and lose their identity as a separate party. Unfortunately for the Populists their gamble did not pay off.

I think it is also interesting how immigration, urbanization, and industrialization had transformed the U.S. into a pluralistic society. By this time it was almost impossible to appeal to only one interest group and carry an election. Compromise among various interest groups had become a political fact of life.

-- posted by historygeek

Top 6. Mar 7, 2004 1:27 PM

» historygeek - Re: Re: welcome back...

In response to message posted by bici:

Hi Barbara,
Thanks for the welcome back and for the positive comments about the article. Boy are you right on with the reference to politics and selling the complete package to the American voter. Speaking of McDonald's makes me think of the "low carb" craze these days. I am surprised that Presidential candidates haven't found a way to jump on that bandwagon and capitalize on its popularity. lol smile

-- posted by historygeek

Top 7. Mar 11, 2004 2:31 PM

» jerrib - Welcome back to this topic

Our current election "doings" should fill history books some day, as have these.

-- posted by jerrib

Top 8. Mar 11, 2004 5:52 PM

» historygeek - Re: Welcome back to this topic

In response to message posted by jerrib:

Thanks Jerri for the "welcome back." Oh yes I am sure future historians will have lots to write about concerning our recent elections. We may indeed overshadow the Gilded Age.

-- posted by historygeek