1976–Cartoon–Emily Petz

Historically, Presidential campaigning revolved heavily around the candidate’s position on Israel. Even before Israel became a nation, Presidents have had a relationship with the Jewish people and building their nation, this dates back to John Adams presidency. Sending this letter to Mordecai Manuel Noah:

Farther I could find it in my heart to wish that you had been at the head of a hundred thousand   Israelites . . . & marching with them into Judea & making a conquest of that country & restoring your nation to the dominion of it. For I really wish the Jews again in Judea an independent nation (1819).

However, when Israel became a country in 1948, it became a major part of the United States presidential campaigns. This showing of support continues today. When a candidate wants to show their level of seriousness, they pay a trip to Israel.

The political cartoon “Dry bones” enlightens this for the 1976 election. While it isn’t discussing the candidates in particular the concept is highlighted during this particular campaign. The cartoon features a young girl crying and her father trying to figure out what is wrong. It is dated November 3, 1976 the day after the general election. The girl’s birthday was the day prior and she was so happy, getting so many presents and good wishes. So the father is baffled as to why she is sad, the little girl is suffering from “post-celebration depression” and she correlates this to being Israel the day after the election.

So many candidates offer much support and promises to the country of Israel. The people voting look upon this with such importance when the candidates are running. However it is usually just another lost political promise. During this time especially the candidates don’t actually have to or care to follow through with the promises that they’ve made. President Ford’s promise regarding the safety of Israel in a release from the White House press,

America must and will pursue friendship with all nations. But, this will never be done at the expense of America’s commitment to Israel. A strong Israel is essential to a stable peace in the Middle East. Our commitment to Israel will meet the test of American stead, fairness, and resolve. My administration will not be found wanting. The United States will continue to help Israel provide for her security. My dedication to Israel’s future goes beyond its military needs to  a far higher priority — the need for peace. My commitment to the security and future of Israel is based upon basic morality as well as enlightened self-interest. Our role in supporting Israel honors our own heritage.

With this statement it is clear that Ford realizes how important to voters the relationship with Israel truly is. Carter’s opinion on the relationship with Israel was similar, he maintains this throughout his term as President. In a press release from the White House, President Carter, early in his first year of his presidency notes about Israel. “We have a special relationship with Israel. It’s absolutely crucial that no one in our country or around the world ever doubt that our number one commitment in the Middle East is to protect the right of Israel to exist, to exist permanently, and to exist in peace. It’s a special relationship.”(1977) Both candidates made a clear connection to the state of Israel and this campaign tactic continues today.

References:

“Dry Bones” Cartoon: http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/us-presidential-campaign-1976.html

Presidential Quotes: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/presquote.html

1884–Cleveland as “Pa”–Corie Stretton

The 1884 election occurred during the Gilded Age in American history, where there was a series of Presidential elections that were very close in terms of the Electoral College, as well as the popular vote.  Though candidates did not campaign in the same way that people today view campaigning, there were certain pieces of rhetoric that were very common for the time.  One of the most popular forms of campaign rhetoric was political cartoons, which often directly attacked the candidate’s personal lives.  This particular cartoon criticizing the Democratic nominee Grover Cleveland is the perfect example of a typical political cartoon for the late 1800s.  The focus of this election quickly turned away from the candidate’s political views and focused mostly on their personal lives and the scandals that ensued.

Entering into the 1884 election, Cleveland was very clearly favored to win.  His “reformism” stressed his dedication to hard work and honesty, which made him a very endearing candidate in the eyes of both Democrats and Republicans (“Grover Cleveland (1837-1908)”).  He also stood up against Tammany Hall, a Democratic political group from his home state of New York, which worked to promote immigrants into government positions; this move gained a lot of support from the middle class, and added to his positive image in the press.  This cartoon, however, worked to completely change how he was viewed.

The story behind this cartoon is known as the Maria Halpin Affair.  In July of 1884, rumors began circulating around the country that Cleveland was involved in a sex scandal with Maria Halpin, a widow who supposedly fathered his child out of wedlock about ten years ago.  It was also said that he not only abandoned the mother and child, but also placed the child in an orphanage and sent the wife to an insane asylum.  Cleveland later admitted to the truthfulness of the accusations made against him, however he denied that Halpin was placed in an asylum, claiming instead that she went to a half-way house due to her alcoholism.  He also would add that he had financially supported the mother and son until she was sent to the half-way house, at which point his son was adopted by “a wealthy couple” (“1884: Cleveland v. Blaine”).  Because he prided himself on his honesty, Cleveland had no choice but to admit to this behavior, but the Democratic campaign continued to twist the details of the situation to make Cleveland seem more like a responsible adult who was merely looking out for the future of his child.

This cartoon, which was published two months prior to election day in September of 1884, portrays Halpin as a clearly distressed, upset woman holding the son she allegedly had with Cleveland, with the child crying, “I want my Pa!”  This soon became the slogan for the Republican party, chanting “Ma, Ma, where’s my Pa?” at Cleveland; the Democratic party, however soon added to the chant to say, “Gone to the White House, ha ha ha!”.  Though much was unknown about Halpin, mostly because no reporters ever interviewed her about the situation, this cartoon chooses to portray her as a well-dressed, sophisticated woman who cannot even look at Cleveland, and is trying to hold her innocent child away from him.  Indeed, the fact that the child is dressed in white is also significant, stressing the innocence of the child born out of wedlock.  This part of the image works to create even more sympathy for her in this situation, showing her as a woman the public can relate to rather than the alcoholic the Cleveland campaign wanted people to believe she was.

Cleveland, on the other hand, looks unintelligent and unprofessional, standing in an odd way with mismatched clothes and an angry, confused look on his face.  This is in direct contrast with how he was normally portrayed, as a moral and honest person.  There is even a tag on his jacket that reads “Grover the Good,” emphasizing further that his positive reputation was not well deserved and pointing to the contradiction displayed in this cartoon.  The tagline at the bottom of the page reads, “Another voice for Cleveland,” showing the public that there was a previously unheard “voice” calling for Cleveland’s attention, particularly his son born from an extramarital affair.  The cartoon is very direct about the message it is trying to send, demonstrating that Cleveland is not as moral as most people may believe, and that he is an incompetent Presidential candidate.  Though Blaine was connected to a series of scandals, this particular one that Cleveland admitted to being involved in deeply affected his campaign, with Cleveland only winning the popular vote by 0.3 percent. 

Sources:

http://elections.harpweek.com/1884/Overview-1884-3.htm

http://millercenter.org/president/cleveland/essays/biography/3

1956–Ike & Football–Yana Rutushny

When Eisenhower ran for re-election in 1956, there was little doubt that he would win. The economy was stable and people were prospering after Eisenhower ended the war with North Korea, winning him a lot of respect and points with the American people. The 1956 election was the first election to use TV commercials as its main medium for campaigning. Almost fifty percent of the American population had a TV in their home and therefore it was an influential campaigning tool. In the prior election, TV advertisements were used for the first time but the campaigning involved thirty-minute long programs advertising the presidential candidate. These thirty-minute long programs evolved into five-minute commercials in the 1956 election.

This commercial addresses the fact that Adlai Stevenson did not have extensive experience in war, whereas Eisenhower did. Eisenhower served in the army and was then appointed as Supreme Commander of NATO forces in 1951. Stevenson did however, have experience in foreign affairs. Stevenson was special assistant to the secretary of the Navy during World War II. In 1945 he worked with the State Department and helped in the organization of the United Nations, serving as an advisor to its first American delegation.

Despite this list of credentials, Stevenson did not have Eisenhower’s popularity. To combat this obstacle, Stevenson argued that Eisenhower’s policies ignored or poorly addressed issues such as nuclear testing, reducing East-West tension, ending the draft and increasing assistance to underdeveloped countries through United Nations aid. Fortunately for Eisenhower he was able to prove his ability to handle foreign conflicts pragmatically. Right before the election, Eisenhower had to deal with two crises. Israel, Britain, and France led a secret attack on Egypt in retaliation to Egypt’s decision to nationalize the Suez Canal.  Eisenhower condemned this action because he was not consulted and the attack was not very democratic. His condemnation for the allied forces attack resulted in nationwide support for Eisenhower.

The next crisis that Eisenhower had to deal with within a few days of the attack on Egypt was the Soviet invasion of Hungary. This occurred in the midst of the Cold War, which was marked by increased tensions between the United States and Russia. Both the United States and the Soviet Union were continuously developing nuclear arms and considered. The Soviet Union was expanding throughout Europe and Asia and had gained control and influence over many regions in Europe such as Poland and eastern Germany. The West had a strong policy of resistance against Soviet/Communist expansion (the Truman Doctrine) until 1953, when both nations developed the hydrogen bomb. Therefore, in order to prevent nuclear war, the Soviet Empire and the United States began working to improve relations. In October of 1956, the Soviets invaded Hungary and suppressed opposition through military force. Although Eisenhower condemned this action and provided aid to Hungarians that were misplaced from the Soviet attack, he avoided getting involved militarily. Eisenhower’s pragmatic decision won him many votes.

Stevenson’s lack of military experience and the possibility that he would lead the country into war are main claims made by this advertisement. Since the end of the Korean War brought prosperity and happiness to most Americans, they did not want to see the United States embark on another war and Eisenhower capitalized on that point. In this video, there are several civilians giving statements about why they want to keep Eisenhower in office. Two of the speakers are mothers of young veterans of the war and a few of the other speakers are older veterans. The use of women in this video was a clever way to appeal to those families who sons served in the Korean War.

Throughout the advertisement, Stevenson is portrayed as an inexperienced candidate that would sooner lead the country into war than continue the peace and prosperity the U.S. was experiencing.

Towards the end of the commercial, the main speaker in the commercial appeals to the voters directly. He tells voters that they were responsible for taking the U.S. out of Korea because they made the decision to make Eisenhower president. The American public is told that they did it the first time therefore they can continue to make good decisions and re-elect Eisenhower. This commercial gives a lot of credit to the voters for the fate of this country and makes them feel as though they are the ones in control of the government.