Archive
1992–Clinton Acceptance Speech–Melanie Modula
My third piece of campaign rhetoric from the 1992 campaign is Bill Clinton’s Democratic Presidential Nomination Acceptance Address. It took place July of 1992 in New York, New York. Throughout his address, Clinton’s aim is relating to the American people and finding common ground. He accepts his nomination for those who work, pay the taxes, raise the kids and play by the rules. Clinton speaks to the hardworking Americans in the middle and lower class.
“I am a product of that middle class, and when I am President, you will be forgotten no more,” Clinton said.
He praises our foreign accomplishments in recent years. The Cold War victory and collapse of the Soviet Union had made us powerful all over the world. While our reputation on an international level was high, we were not progressing as well at home. “Now that we have changed the world, it’s time to change America,” Clinton said.
Bill Clinton’s address touches on the major domestic issues like the economy, and unemployment. He reaches the people facing these issues by talking to them on a personal level and sharing his story. In the early stages of a campaign, it is important to let the American public know about who the candidate is as a person. Bill Clinton accomplishes that with this speech.
His father died before he was born, leaving his mother to support the family. His mother sacrificed a lot to give Bill the chances and life he deserved and he credits all of strength and courage he has to her.
“You want to know where I get my fighting spirit? It all started with my mother. Thank you, Mother. I love you,“ Clinton said.
Clinton touches on his childhood, his mother, his grandparents, his wife and his daughter. Voters can hear candidates discuss the issues time and time again, but the personal stories have a greater affect on their feelings toward the candidate.
A main theme of Clinton’s campaign is changing government. Clinton says, “Frankly, I’m fed up with politicians in Washington lecturing the rest of us about family values. Our families have values but our government doesn’t”
He finds irony in the fact that Republicans preach against big government but have been running that same big government for years.
Clinton stresses he is different from other politicians. He knows the struggle all different families are going through on a daily basis during difficult economic times. One quote in this acceptance address represents this idea.
“And I want to say something to every child in America tonight who is out there trying to grow up without a father or a mother: I know how you feel. You’re special too. You matter to America. And don’t you ever let anybody tell you that you can’t become whatever you want to be. And, if other politicians make you feel like you are not part of their family, come on and be part of ours.”
Hearing Clinton’s speech makes voters feel like the current government does not have the American people’s best interest at heart. The Clinton campaign preaches a desire to change. The audience chants, “no second term” in support of Bill Clinton.
Clinton does not mention President Bush until about halfway through the speech. He wants to focus on himself, his campaign and his principles. He eventually mentions George Bush to make comparisons. The Clinton/Gore campaign will be more environmentally friendly, more focused on equal rights for woman, and a better education system for all children.
In my opinion, the most persuasive and influential part of Clinton’s speech is the conclusion. He talks about the future of our nation through the coming generations.
Let it be our cause to give that child a happy home, a healthy family and a hopeful future. Let it be our cause to see that that child has a chance to live to the fullest of her God-given capacities.
1860–“Five Eras” Prints–Sarah Moran
With the election of 1860 looming, the weakened Democratic Party had divided into Northern and Southern factions. The leading Democrat in the North was Stephen A. Douglas while the leading Democrat in the South was John C. Breckenridge. The Republicans chose a more moderate candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to run on their ticket. Constitutional Union candidate, John Bell, rounded out the list of presidential hopefuls during the election of 1860 (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”).
With the nation divided over the issue of slavery, the Republicans did not even run a slate in most Southern states. The race in the South was between Democrat John C. Breckenridge and Constitutional Union candidate John Bell. The real race in the North was between Republican Abraham Lincoln and Democrat Stephen Douglas (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”). The two candidates had very different tactics and campaigning styles. Douglas was the first candidate to go on a nationwide speaking tour prior to the election. With his dark hair and piercing eyes, Douglas was known for his compelling speaking style that always commanded the attention of his audience with his intelligence and deep voice (“Stephen A. Douglas and the American Union”). In contrast, Lincoln did not campaign or give speeches of his own. The Republicans and their supporters, such as the Wide Awakes, ran pamphlets, leaflets and editorials throughout the North (“United States Presidential Election of 1860”).
Lincoln and Douglas, both with political roots in Illinois, had met in the political arena before. In 1858, Lincoln and Douglas battled for control of the Illinois legislature in a series of seven debates taking place in seven of the nine districts in Illinois (“Stephen A. Douglas and the American Union”). Slavery was the main issue discussed during these debates. Both candidates’ stances on slavery were the same in 1858 as they ran on in 1860. Lincoln opposed the abolition of slavery into new territories while Douglas supported popular sovereignty. At the end of the debates, Douglas was re-elected to the Senate but Lincoln had established a political foothold that would carry him through to the election of 1860 (“Stephen A. Douglas and the American Union”).
Experience proved to be a key aspect of the senate election and the Democrats used experience again to their advantage. The second piece of rhetoric I chose to focus on captures just that. This piece of rhetorical history was actually a two-part cartoon that appeared in “The Campaign Plain Dealer and Popular Sovereignty Advocate,” which was a popular Democratic campaign publication of the time. The first piece of the cartoon titled “The Five Eras in Douglas’s Life Illustrated” pictured different periods of Douglas’s life and appeared on July 21, 1860. The cartoon depicts Douglas’s earlier professional life as a cabinetmaker and a teacher. The bottom corners depict Douglas as a U.S. Senator and meeting Tsar Nicholas I during a political tour of Europe in 1853. Finally, the middle shows Douglas as President of the United States (“Five Eras in Old Abe’s Life Illustrated”). As your eyes travel down the page, the more grand and political the experience gets for Douglas all leading up to the middle of the cartoon, him becoming President of the United States.
One week later, on July 28, 1860, “The Campaign Plain Dealer and Popular Sovereignty Advocate” came out with part two of “The Five Eras.” This cartoon depicted different periods of Republican candidate “Old Abe’s” life but in a condescending tone. The left corner depicts Lincoln as a rail-splitter, an image that is a recurrent theme used by both parties during the Campaign. The Republicans’ use it to their advantage to illustrate and draw upon Lincoln’s humble 
background. One famous cartoon pictures Lincoln splitting his “last rail,” which is labeled as the Democratic Party, taking a shot at the divided party. The Democrats’ however, use it to mock Lincoln’s lack of political experience compared to Douglas. The top right corner depicts Lincoln as the “rear admiral” of a flat boat. The bottom of the cartoon depicts Lincoln being strangled by an Indian during the Black Hawk War and immediately next to it is Lincoln accepting the Republican nomination for President. The middle of the cartoon depicts Lincoln again as a rail-splitter implying that he lost the election and had to go back to his roots (“Five Eras of Old Abe’s Life Illustrated”). Part two is a direct attack on Lincoln’s lack of political experience in relation to his main challenger in the North, Stephen Douglas. In this cartoon, as your eyes travel down the cartoon Lincoln’s experience never grows in prestige like Douglas’ does.
Lincoln and Douglas were not new enemies on the political scene, dating back to their political roots in Illinois during the 1858 debates. Recurrent themes, especially that of experience, come back as dominant rhetorical strategies employed by the Democratic Party.
Works Cited
“Five Eras in Old Abe’s Life Illustrated.” Harp Week. Web. 20 Apr. 2011. <http://elections.harpweek.com/1860/cartoon-1860-Medium.asp?UniqueID=11>.
“Stephen A. Douglas and the American Union.” The University of Chicago Library. Web. 20 Apr. 2011. <http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/spcl/excat/douglas1.html>.
“United States Presidential Election of 1860.” Encyclopedia Virginia. 28 May 2009. Web. 20 Apr. 2011. <http://encyclopediavirginia.org/United_States_Presidential_Election_of_1860>.
1972–Nixon Acceptance Speech–Stephanie D’Anna
Speeches are an effective form of Presidential rhetoric in any campaign. In the 1972 Presidential election between George McGovern and Richard Nixon, there were many speeches given in hopes of persuading audiences to vote for them. The speech I am going to focus on is the Presidential Nomination of the Republican National Convention which was given by Richard Nixon on August 23, 1972 when he was nominated to run for a second term as President of the United States. The speech was broadcast live from Convention Hall in Miami Beach, Florida and shown and heard across the nation via radio and television.
Richard Nixon begins the speech by reminding the audience ,
four years ago, standing in this very place, I proudly accepted your nomination for President of the United States. With your help and with the votes of millions of Americans, we won a great victory in 1968. Tonight, I again proudly accept your nomination for President of the United States.
By using this introduction, Nixon reminds the audience that he is proud to serve as our nation’s leader and that he needs the help of Americans to win again. Telling them that he needs their help allows the audience to believe their vote has value and that their vote really matters.
He continues to thank or congratulate all the people that are a part of his platform that made his first victory, and chances for a second victory, possible. He also thanks his wife saying
I express my deep gratitude to this convention for the tribute you have paid to the best campaigner in the Nixon family-my wife Pat. In honoring her, you have honored millions of women in America who have contributed in the past and will contribute in the future so very much to better government in this country.
By thanking his wife, he connects with the women in America and shows them that their vote matters as well. Women might be more apt to vote for a man who takes time to thank his wife.
He says that American people have inspired him with their enthusiasm, their intelligence, and their dedication. Again, this lets the American people know that he appreciates their support. Although it is important to show gratitude towards his current supporters, the point of this speech is to win over the people that do not support him, he needs to win their vote. In an attempt to win over his non-supporters, Nixon asks everyone to vote not based on the party label they wear on their lapel, but on the basis of what they believe in their hearts. He specifically addresses new voters,
I pledge to you, all of the new voters in America who are listening on television and listening here in this convention hall, that I will do everything that I can over these next four years to make your support be one that you can be proud of, because as I said to you last night, and I feel it very deeply in my heart: Years from now I want you to look back and be able to say that your first vote was one of the best votes you ever cast in your life.
He identifies with the American people by saying things like ‘my fellow Americans,’ also by calling America “home” and stating that when he travels to other countries, he realizes how fortunate we are to live in this ‘great and good country.’
He addresses his successes in the past four years and he also discusses his goals for when he is re-elected. Towards the end of the speech, Nixon talks about a previous President, Abraham Lincoln. He brought up the Civil war between the states in our nation and quoted Abraham Lincoln when he was asked whether God was on his side. Lincoln replied, “my concern is not whether God is on our side, but whether we are on God’s side.” Nixon hopes for this to remain America’s prayer forever. He says that with faith in God, ourselves, and our country we can meet any challenge we face as a nation.
In the end of the speech, Nixon then tries to relate to audience even more by telling the story of the ‘beautiful child’ named Tanya, whose grave he visited at a cemetery in Leningrad in the Soviet Union, the battlegrounds for World War II. He shares that he read her diary and her stories of how her whole family had died and she was the only one left still alive. He does this to show Americans he is interested in world peace that “our children and all the children of the world can enjoy for generations to come.” He is not interested in peace only in America, but in the world as a whole.
Overall, the purpose of Richard Nixon’s speech after being nominated for his second term, was to thank the people who had helped him get where he had gotten to date, and to win over his non-supporters. He wanted to show people that he was proud to be in the position he is in and that he is the most credible candidate for the position of President of the United States.
1856–Sweepstakes Cartoon–Dan Hawvermale
The political cartoon I choose is called The Balls Are Rolling – Clear the Track and is an attack on the Buchanan campaign. The theme of the cartoon is to attack Buchanan where he is at his weakest. The cartoon attempts to exploit political issues that have been negative for the Democratic Party as a whole and Buchanan personally. Many of the attacks are ones that have been in the “media” for some time at this point. Some might say that this cartoon had little impact because many of the issues were already known to the public. Many of the arguments against Buchanan stem from his relationship with Franklin Pierce and the Democratic Party.
The way that the cartoon forms these attacks on Buchanan and the Democratic Party is by showing Buchanan being crushed by giant stone spheres. These stone spheres bear and etching of the states that are supposed to crush the Democratic campaign. The stone spheres are Maine, Vermont, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, Connecticut, Illinois, Wisconsin New Jersey, Michigan, Massachusetts, Rohde Island, New Hampshire and Indiana. Under all of these stone sphere states lies Buchanan, half sunk into a hole labeled “Cincinnati Platform.” Buchanan being crushed by the spheres exclaims “Oh Dear!_ Oh Dear! This Platform will be the death of me. I’m nearly crushed out already!” Footnotes in the cartoon explain that the balls may be intended to recall the giant ball of Locofocoism used to the derision of the Democrats in Whig cartoons of the 1840 presidential campaign.
In the back of the cartoon you can see into the distance which shows a burning town in Kansas, with families fleeing for their lives. Also in the distance are the Rocky Mountains, a railroad train going towards California, and the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Also on the upper left hand side of the cartoon is an eagle holding a banderole with Republican candidates’ names “Fremont” and “Dayton.” The eagle clutches bundled cartridge with the words “Union,” “Liberty,” and “Constitution” on it. To the right of the eagle is a banner strewn through the sky as if it were a rainbow stating “Free Soil, Free Speech, Free Men & Fermont.” This was the Republican Party’s motto at the time of the 1856 election.
Lying in front of the half sunk Buchanan are a pieces of paper strewn out stating various claims against Buchanan and the Democratic Party. Each of the papers refers to a different negative political event such as Kane Lecompte, Ostend, Polygamy and Slavery, Kansas bogus Laws, Border Ruffianism. Many of these topic refer to the democratic party’s treatment of Kansas regarding slavery. Fillmore is standing by Buchanan saying “Oh James! Erastus! Lying wont scare me, I hear the coming take me off the tack.” He is also holds two documents, the “Fugitive Slave Bill” and an “Albany Speech.” The fugitive Slave bill was a law that made it legal to come bring slaves back from northern free states. Many times southerners would come grab any black man the met the description of their slaves and take them back against their will. This along with the vehement enforcement of the law by Fillmore and his cabinet created a huge amount of resentment from northern states towards both Fillmore and the Democratic Party as a whole.
It is worthy to note that this cartoon aired in a relatively “Democratic newspaper.” The cartoonist normally did not draw cartoons in favor of Fremont and often drew cartoons depicting him in negative manner. This cartoon may have had a greater effect if it were shown to Northern states in a Republican newspaper.
Sources:
https://dcl.umn.edu/search/search_results?search_string=political%20cartoon&per_page=12
1988–Revolving Door Ad–Jared Owens
During his campaign for the Presidency in the 1988 election, Dukakis’s support for prison furloughs was arguably his most controversial subject. The original state inmate furlough program did not allow first-degree murderers to have weekend passes, like other prisoners. Republican Governor Francis W. Sargent signed this into law in 1972.
However, “In 1976, the state legislature passed a bill that would have ended the furloughs of first-degree murderers. Governor Dukakis, as the Edsalls point out, vetoed it. A strong advocate of prisoners’ rights, he contended that the bill would ‘cut the heart out of efforts at inmate rehabilitation (Wiki).'” During his second term, his veto allowed Willie Horton to be furloughed – one of the first-degree murderers who was allowed out. During his furlough, Willie Horton broke into a house, raped a woman and assaulted her husband in Maryland. Obviously, this caused a huge problem for Dukakis, and the Bush campaign jumped on it.
“A conservative political action committee affiliated with the Bush campaign, the National Security Political Action Committee, aired an ad entitled “Weekend Passes”, which used a mug shot image of Horton. The Bush campaign refused to repudiate it. That ad campaign was followed by a separate Bush campaign ad, “Revolving Door”, also criticizing Dukakis over the furlough program.”
The Revolving Door Ad is a negative ad attacking Dukakis, and it is considered to be one of the prime factors in his defeat in the Presidential election race. It first aired on October 5, 1988, and was created by Roger Ailes and Lee Atwater. Revolving Door Syndrome is a criminology term for recidivism, which means that someone will continue to repeat an undesirable and/or illegal act even after being reprimanded and having had experienced negative consequences for said acts. The Revolving Door ad, coupled with the Willie Horton ad, had a very serious impact on the public and did irreversible damage to the Dukakis campaign. The fact that a kidnap, assault and rape happened not only on Dukakis’s watch, but because Dukakis vetoed legislation to prevent this from happening, really worked against his public image and policy ideals.
The Revolving Door ad was voted to have had the most impact on voters during the election campaign, as the results taken from a CBS/New York Times poll show. Bush’s “Revolving Door” ad was linked to mentions of crime and law and order as the most important problems facing the United States. Among those who had not seen the ad only 5 percent cited these problems, whereas 12 percent of those who had seen the ad named this area. This fits with longitudinal evidence cited by Marjorie Hershey, who found that “the proportion of respondents saying that George Bush was ‘tough enough’ on crime and criminals rose from 23 percent in July to a full 61 percent in late October, while the proportion saying Dukakis was not tough enough rose from 36 to 49 percent.” Willie Horton’s furlough, and eventual rape attack also caused women to take a much higher stance on crime as a priority in America (InsidePolitics).
Sources:
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/20/books/what-became-of-the-democrats.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Dukakis#Massachusetts_governor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_Door_(television_advertisement)
2004–Kerry Ad–Olivia Berardi
Perhaps the most basic of Presidential television campaign advertisements have served to highlight the outstanding achievements of a given presidential candidate. Generally speaking, those television advertisements outlining the life-story of a given candidate are far simpler to write, and similarly, easier for the general public to follow in comparison to advertisements that tackle real policy issues, or ones that attack the platform of an opposing candidate. The purpose of life-story advertisements is to familiarize the viewer with the candidate in light of his character; references to his policies tend to come secondary in more personal advertisements, while family ties and personal experiences come to the forefront.
This ad, in particular, entitled “Lifetime,” serves to explain the 2004 Democratic Presidential Candidate John Kerry’s origins, and proceeds to recount his history of patriotic accomplishments which have lead him to pursue the office of the President of the United States. At the beginning of the advertisement, it appears as though the clip is merely a chronological account of John Kerry’s life, in efforts to depict this exemplary leadership capacity, and associated experiences that have shaped his strong character. However, after the first few frames, we begin to recognize a trend of military references, which soon culminate in a substantial homage to Senator Kerry’s heroic service during the Vietnam War. Here, we see that the advertisement has a decidedly militaristic bend, which serves to underscore Senator Kerry’s patriotism, dedication to persons in the armed forces, capacity to lead and negotiate, and overall track-record that makes him appear “worthy” of the Presidency.
As the advertisement states, John Kerry was born in an Army hospital in Colorado, and comes from a military family. His voluntary service in Vietnam is more than his competitor, George W. Bush, or President Bush’s Vice Presidential Candidate, Dick Cheney, can boast. One might think that George W. Bush’s political lineage would be the ideal background for a Presidential candidate. However, the advertisement depicts John Kerry’s roots and military and political experience as qualifications that surely merit the Presidency. An informed viewer would contrast Kerry’s military service with the lack-there-of in both George W. Bush and Vice Presidential Candidate Dick Cheney.
The advertisement goes further to acknowledge Senator John Kerry’s alliance with Senator John McCain, in the quest to “find the truth about POW’s and MIA’s in Vietnam.” Although this statement is vague, the viewer can only assume that this references a concerted dual-party effort to provide remedy for others who have served in the armed forces. At least, this cross-party partnership emphasizes John Kerry’s apparent ability to put party-politics aside in order to afford justice where justice has been denied to Americans fighting in our armed forces.
Indeed, this advertisement serves not only to acquaint the viewers with John Kerry as an individual; equally as paramount in the goals of this advertisement is to paint John Kerry as the most patriotic of candidates. The notion of having protected our nation conjures a heroic, masculine, and fearless image. This advertisement serves to illustrate that Senator Kerry has all of the qualities and experiences that our greatest past presidents have had; he looks like a President, has served in the armed forces and the Senate, and calls upon real individuals to testify to his acts of heroism in the name of the United States—on paper, he is the quintessential presidential candidate.
The sign-off “A lifetime of service and strength” encapsulates a Presidential candidate that is sympathetic to the “every-man,” and also capable of fervent leadership. Overall, the advertisement seems to say that America would be safe and secure in the hands of John Kerry. Interestingly, this advertisement does not speak at all to George W. Bush’s lack of accomplishments in the specific areas that John Kerry demonstrates expertise. However, any informed voter would be cognizant of Bush’s comparative dearth in both military service, creation of jobs, and ability to cooperate with other party members in a progressive manner. Any uninformed voter might likely be swayed by the veridical nature of this advertisement, including John Kerry’s military background, the personal accounts, and his actions as Senator that have produces real change to which a variety of Americans can relate.
1960–Kennedy Ad–David Geaney
In 1960 Richard Nixon ran against John F. Kennedy for President of the United States of America. In August 1960 polls showed that Nixon had a slight lead over Kennedy, and many political observers considered Nixon the favorite to win. It was the events arising in the fall of 1960 that ultimately brought about the defeat Nixon’s presidential bid.
Richard Nixon used his years as Vice President under Dwight D. Eisenhower to present himself as an experienced politician, having already made many critical decisions in the White House. One of the main arguments the Nixon campaign made against Kennedy being elected to the White House was that his youth and inexperience could very easily be taken advantage of by the Soviet Union and those others that would seek to do harm to the United States of America.
In order to stand a viable chance against a Nixon, who had vastly more experience in White House politics than Kennedy did, the Kennedy campaign needed to strike at the foundation for Nixon’s claim to experience: his years in the Vice Presidency under Dwight D. Eisenhower. Nixon often claimed that his years as Vice President under Dwight D Eisenhower had provided him with critical decision making experience within the White House, a claim that Kennedy’s campaign was originally unable to successfully dispel and could most definitely never match. This decision making experience within the White House gave Nixon a distinct advantage over Kennedy who did not have White House credentials. The Kennedy campaign needed to find a way to put Nixon’s decision making experience into question, so that Nixon would not be able to use Kennedy’s relative youth and inexperience against him as frequently and successfully as he had been throughout the campaign.
Just the opportunity to challenge Nixon’s decision making credentials arose after an August of 1960 press conference with President Eisenhower. During the press conference, Charles Mohr of Time, asked President Eisenhower if he could give an example of a major idea presented by Nixon, which he had heeded. President Eisenhower jokingly responded “If you give me a week, I might think of one.” Although later, both Eisenhower and Nixon claimed the response was in jest, this comment ultimately hurt the Nixon campaign and his claim to having more decision m
aking experience than Kennedy. It hurt him so much so that the Kennedy campaign used a clip of what Eisenhower said and placed it into a political ad challenging Nixon’s decision making experience in the White House. The political ad started by saying that Nixon claimed he had more experience than Kennedy and made it seem like he even had decision making experience within the White House. The political ad used the question asked by Charles Mohr and the joking response given by Eisenhower, combined with another audio clip of the press conference in which Eisenhower said “No one can make a decision except me.” This was intended to make the American people question whether Nixon had made any decisions at all within the White House. The ad directly challenged that Nixon had any more decision making experience than Kennedy did, putting one of the primary advantages Nixon had into question. This helped to level the playing field between the two candidates, as Nixon often used his time as Vice President to show that he had vastly more experience than Kennedy, who had never held position in the White House.
The Kennedy campaign’s ad against the decision making experience of Richard Nixon was a success. The American people were forced to question whether Richard Nixon had any decision making experience, and whether one of Nixon’s primary advantages was nothing more than talk. The wide circulation of the ad helped to distribute the idea to the American people that Richard Nixon did not have as much experience making decisions as he claimed to have.
While no one can say whether one particular aspect of a campaign resulted in that presidential bid being a success or failure, because the 1960 election between John F Kennedy and Richard Nixon was so close, and 16 states were won by a margin of 2.5 percent or less, it must be asked whether Kennedy would have won if he had been unable to undermine Nixon’s experience as a decision maker in the White House. Ultimately no one will ever know, but it is undeniable that the Kennedy campaigns ability to bring Nixon’s decision making experience into question was a pivotal part of the 1960 campaign and helped to level the playing field between both candidates, despite Kennedy’s relative youth and inexperience.
Sources:
Leip, David. 1960 Presidential Election Results. Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections (February 7, 2008).
1884–Political Cartoon–Corie Stretton
Unfortunately, the candidates who lose in Presidential elections throughout history are often forgotten. During the Gilded Age in American history, there was a series of elections that were decided by a fraction of the vote, which means that we could have very easily elected the other men who ran for the position. Despite this fact, their names are still mostly unknown. James Blaine is the perfect example of this, competing against Grover Cleveland in the 1884 election. While his campaign was surrounded by scandal, he still managed to come very close to beating Cleveland, losing the popular vote by only 0.3 percent.
Many political cartoons were made in reference to Blaine’s embarrassing past, with this particular cartoon acting as a reference to a group of people called the Mugwumps. This was a group of politicians from the Republican Party who were displeased with Blaine as the Republican nomination for President, and crossed party lines to support Cleveland instead. They considered themselves to be reformers, and believed in Cleveland’s competency as a candidate much more than Blaine’s. They were soon known as “Mugwumps,” named after the Algonquian Indian word for an important, or self-important, person, and were subject to a great deal of criticism from the rest of their party. Indeed, there were other cartoons drawn that showed these politicians sitting on a fence with “their ‘mug’ on one side of the fence and their “wump” on the other. Sometimes, they were even referred to as “hermaphrodites,” or homosexuals, because they refused to support the party they came from (Frum). “Their actions were seen as a complete betrayal of the Republican Party, and contributing to Blaine’s eventual loss in the election.
This cartoon demonstrates the fear of the Republican Party, and how they were convinced that the Mugwumps would bring about the destruction of Blaine’s campaign. The scene is modeled off of a story from the Bible known as Belshazzar’s Feast. In this story, Belshazzar, the king, is having a great feast with many of his lords with a great deal of food and drink to go around. In the middle of this dinner, “fingers of a man’s hand” appeared and wrote a threatening message on the wall that his kingdom would be destroyed, while a voice spoke about how Belshazzar had dishonored his father before him as king. Later that night, Belshazzar was killed, and a new king took over the kingdom (“Belshazzar’s Feast Bible Story”).
Related to this story, the cartoon has the words “Republican Revolt” written on the wall in the middle of what appears to be a large feast for Blaine, his Vice Presidential candidate John Logan, and several over politicians. Blaine, tattooed in the countless scandals he was associated with, is trying to hide from the ominous message behind pieces of newspapers, with a scared look on his face. Like Belshazzar, Blaine would inevitably fail in his pursuits, and in this cartoon the Mugwumps are being shown as the ones responsible. In addition, Logan is laying next to him, trying to block the message with his hand while wearing what appears to be clothes similar to the Native Americans, once again drawing a connection to the term Mugwumps and its meaning in the Algonquian Indian language. Logan’s positioning also reinforces the idea that Logan is less powerful and less significant compared to Blaine, with him literally falling down below Blaine.
The expressions of the faces of the men seated at the feast have similar looks of fear, as they all appear to be backing away from the message or even fighting each other to run away. The ears of the men who are attempting to escape are enlarged to resemble rats, belittling their integrity and showing their cowardice. The “food” they are feasting on is called “Pension Pie” and “Monopoly Stew,” referencing Republican Party’s initiatives related to monopolies and pensions at the time. Labeling all of the individuals also worked to hold them accountable to the American public for supporting a supposedly doomed candidate. These characters range from the speaker of the New York assembly to the editor of the Chicago Tribune (“1884: Cleveland v. Blaine- The Writing on the Wall”). The magazine where this cartoon was published, Puck, tended to favor the Democratic Party, and this preference is made even more obvious in this cartoon.
Sources:
http://elections.harpweek.com/1884/Overview-1884-3.htm
http://elections.harpweek.com/1884/cartoon-1884-large.asp?UniqueID=54&Year=1884
http://www.hymns.me.uk/51-belshazzars-feast-bible-story.htm
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/01/bring-back-the-mugwumps/7842/
1856–Pro-Fillmore Cartoon–Dan Hawvermale
I choose to discuss this cartoon because it was one of the few pieces of presidential rhetoric that actually favored Fillmore in the presidential campaigning of 1856. Although he only received 1/5 of the overall vote Fillmore played an important role in the election stealing votes from both candidates thus making it a much closer race. At the time of the 1856 election the Whig party had fallen apart and Fillmore had no formal party to run for since he refused to join the Republican Party. With little options he chooses to run for the “Know Nothing Party” with Andrew Jackson Donelson as his vice president, who was the nephew of former president Andrew Jackson. Even though I stated earlier that Fillmore only accomplished receiving 20% of the vote, it was one of the most impressive showings from a third party candidate in history. It should also be noted that Fillmore was attempting to be nominated for a second, nonconsecutive term. This feat has only been accomplished by one president in history sir, Grover Cleveland., and is by no means an easy task.
In the cartoon I choose we see Fillmore with a much more optimistic view on the presidential race than the 205 he actually received in the end. In the cartoon Fillmore is in the leading carriage uttering the words “Founded by Washington the only sure Line to Washington is the American Express,” while his driver concurs, “We’ve got a sure thing on this race.” This is ironic considering the final outcome of the election, but the real comedy in the cartoon lies in its depiction of the other candidates.
The cartoon depicts Fillmore’s opponent James Buchanan and his incumbent predecessor Franklin as tag teaming the horse race. As a metaphor to Franklin’s endorsement of Buchannan’s running for president, he is seen carrying piggyback style during the race. Buchanon voices his worries to Pierce saying “Frank, I am afraid we aint got legs enough to beat Fillmore, but its some comfort to see old Greelys team stuck in the mud.” This is Buchanan voicing his concerns about the fact the Fraklin Peircee couldn’t even win his own re-nomination for the party.
Buchanan also refers to “Greelys team”, which is John C. Fermont’s campaign who is stuck in pool of mud labeled “Abolition Cess Pool.” Leading his carriage is New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley who is trying to pull the “nag” out of the mud with the carriage. The “nag” is a symbol for abolitionist all over the country and represents Fremont being lead blindly by abolitionist promoters. Abolitionist preacher Henry Ward Beecher tries to force the back wheel using a rifle as a lever. As he attempts to pry the carriage free he yells to Horace Greenly “Brother Horace jerk his [i.e., the nag’s] head up once more and Shriek for Kansas, and I’ll give the wheel a pry with my rifle.” The reference is to Republican attempts to exploit the Kansas violence as an election issue, and also to Beecher’s arming of antislavery settlers in Kansas. Horace greenly replies to Beecher “It’s no use crying Kansas any more it don’t Prick his Ears a bit–I guess we’re about used up.” Fremont hears the two of them bickering and exclaims “Oh that I had kept the road & not tried to wade through this dirty ditch, but these fellows persuaded me, it was a shorter Way–and so I’ve gone it blind.” This shows his disappointment about choosing to support anti-slavery measures and making it a part of his campaign.
Bcuhanan himself in the cartoon expresses his concern regarding his ability to carry the party with which Franklin Pierce replies with his own concerns about not being re-nominated for the party, exclaiming “I don’t see how my party expect me to carry this old platform in, a winner, when they thought I had’nt legs enough to run for myself.” A by stander in the crowd mocks Pierce carrying Buchanan saying “I say Pierce aint that platform heavy?” The other members of the crowd are yelling as well. It is also worthy to note that this cartoon was aired in the newspaper Nathaniel Currier, in a few months prior to the 1856 election.
Sources:
1868–Campaign Card–Justin Snow
The election of 1868 saw Civil War hero and Republican nominee Ulysses S. Grant poised against Democratic Governor Horatio Seymour of New York. This was just three years after the end of the war and assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Being the first election since the war’s end, rhetoric surrounding the Confederacy ran high and Republicans used their martyred president to their advantage against Democrats, who were largely painted as compatriots of the Confederates.
The first example of campaign rhetoric is a campaign card issued by the Grant campaign in 1868. It is also an excellent example of social campaigning.
The campaign card capitalizes on Grant’s military record as well as his humble roots. Before his service in the military, Grant was largely unsuccessful in everything he did. The son of a tanner, he worked in his father’s tanning shop in Illinois as a young man before the Civil War. Tanners were leather workers. They created such things as saddles, belts, gloves, and other leather goods. They also skinned the hides of cows and stretched and dyed them to create leather. In the campaign card, the Grant campaign uses this to make an analogy towards Grant’s opponents. The card reads that Grant and his vice presidential nominee, Schuyler Colfax, “respectfully inform the People of the United States that they will be engaged in Tanning old Democratic Hides” until after election day 1868. In this segment of the text, Grant, who was highly popular in the north after the end of the Civil War, is being projected to crush his Democratic opponents in the election. But instead of phrasing that in plain language, they allude to Grant’s roots as a tanner and the impressions many held of that work, which most voters would have been aware of at the time. The following line enforces the fact that Grant has experience in that field.
At the bottom of the card several references are listed as if this truly were a business card given to someone in need of a tanner. The references include General Buckner, who was Simon Bolivar Buckner, a Confederate general from Kentucky who surrendered Fort Donelson to Grant in 1862. The second reference is General Robert E. Lee, the commanding Confederate general of the Army of Northern Virginia who famously surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House in April 1865, bringing a close to the Civil War in the eastern theatre. The third and final reference is General Pemberton, who surrendered the city of Vicksburg to Grant in the summer of 1863 after a several month long siege. (Interestingly enough, Pemberton is considered the founder of Coca-Cola. A surgeon from Atlanta, Pemberton created a coca wine to ease wounded soldiers’ addiction to morphine. His concoction would later become Coke.)
The Grant campaign’s rhetoric is quite clever. It works on various levels but particularly because it’s funny. These are names many voters would know after having fought in the war a few years before or followed it in the newspapers. As such, the Grant campaign is able to allude to his military record as a hero without ever once mentioning the war directly. Indeed, the only military reference is the prefix of general before the three reference names. Not even Grant is referred to as a general, merely a tanner.
The use of a campaign card does several things as well. Not only is it furthering the humor of the text by acting as a kind of business card, it is also something that could be distributed to numerous people at events like fairs or parades. As such, it is a very personalized and social piece of campaign material and rhetoric that foreshadows the mailers that many campaigns use today
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Card1868USElectionGrantAndColfaxTanners.jpg
Presidential Campaign Rhetoric 
