ARCHIVE ARTICLES

 

 


With George W's victory, it will be the second time in American history that a father and a son were both presidents. John Adams was president from 1797 to 1801, and his son, John Quincy Adams, was president from 1825-1829.

There are other similarities between the Adams duo and the present Bush duo. John Adams, the father, was elected because the sitting president, George Washington, designated him as his successor. When Adams ran on his own in 1800, he lost.

Exactly like the other president who was father of a later president, George Bush, Senior, was selected by Ronald Reagan as his successor. But when he ran on his own in 1992, he lost.

George W. Bush was elected by less popular votes than his opponent. John Quincy Adams got a lot less votes in 1824 than the man he defeated, Andrew Jackson. Like John Q., George W. is likely to lose in 2004.

I doubt there are many knowledgeable people who disagree with me that Bush, Jr. is a one-termer. We also all know that the Republicans will lose their majority in both Houses of Congress in 2002.

Remember that what Bush is trying to do is please the media by being completely different from that evil partisan Gingrich. And what the Republicans have right now is the same majority that evil Gingrich won for them six years ago. The media want the good old fashioned bipartisan moderates back, the ones who always lost. Bush will bring back those good old days.

There is one more little similarity between the Adamses and the Bushes that needs mentioning. After John Adams, his opponents, the Jeffersonian Democrats, took over American politics for twenty-four years, from 1801-1825. . After the senior Bush, the Democrats got their first elected two-term president since Franklin Roosevelt.

After John Quincy Adams had his four years, his opponents, the Jackson Democrats, took over American politics until 1861.

I think we all know what happened then.

 

THE THING THAT WOULDN'T DIE


In 1800, as I said, John Adams lost the election overwhelmingly.

But something else happened in 1800. George Washington and John Adams had been Federalists. But after Adams' defeat in 1800, that party began to die. It got only the votes of New England in elections after 1800, and soon it disappeared even there.

In 1932, 1934, and 1936, the same process began with the Republican Party. It began the historic process of dying, so that by 1937, it held only 86 out of 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives. Like the dying Federalist Party, it got electoral votes only from two New England States in 1936.

But the Republican Party did not die. Instead, it became a "me too party." Anything the liberal Democrats did, the liberal Republicans soon said was just fine. Conservative Republicans, in order to save the Republican Party, gave it to the liberals and moderates.

Everybody talks about how the middle of the road is the majority and is supposed to dominate elections. But after World War II, the Southern Democrats were conservative almost to a man. The Republican Party was solidly conservative. Northern ethnic Democrats were socially very conservative indeed. In fact, there were two huge blocks of conservative voters that made up the base of each of the two parties.

But during all those years, it was the liberal Democrats and the liberal Republicans who ruled their parties nationally.

Today, conservative Republicans do exactly what the 1936 Republicans did. Instead of killing the stupid thing, they sacrifice everything to get a few mythical votes from minority groups in order to keep the stinking carcass of the Republican Party alive.

What if, like the Federalists in 1800, the Republican Party had done the honorable thing and simply DIED? Republicans, the overwhelming majority of them conservatives, would have become part of the Democratic Party, and that party would effectively have ceased to exist with its Republican rival. A new Era of Good Feeling would have come upon America, as it did with the demise of the Federalists.

What if all those Republican conservatives had joined the Southern conservatives and the Northern ethnic social conservatives in the Democratic Party? Would Roosevelt have gotten a third and fourth term? Would Democratic liberals have taken over our national politics, with the connivance of Republican liberals, moderates, and now respectable conservatives?

No way. If the Republican label had died, the American nation might have lived.

 

Home | Current Articles | Article Archive | About Bob Whitaker | Contact Bob | Links | Privacy Policy

MENU

Home

Current Articles

Article Archive

Whitaker's World View

World View Archives

About Bob Whitaker

Contact Bob

Links

Privacy Policy


Current Issue
Issue: Dec. 16, 2000
Editor: Virgil H. Huston, Jr.
© 2001 WhitakerOnLine.org


Email List
Sign up for our email list to be notified of site updates:
E-Mail:

© Copyright 2001, 2002. All rights reserved. Contact: bob@whitakeronline.org