Expansionism

Is George H. W. Bush The “Best” One Term President In American History, Surpassing James K. Polk, And What About Jimmy Carter?

Ronald Leave a comment

Now that George H. W. Bush is part of American history, the question arises whether he should be judged the “best” one term President in American history.

We have had the following 12 one term elected Presidents who finished their term, but were not given a second term:

John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Martin Van Buren
James K. Polk
Franklin Pierce
James Buchanan
Rutherford B. Hayes
Benjamin Harrison
William Howard Taft
Herbert Hoover
Jimmy Carter
George H. W. Bush

Eight of them, all but Polk, Pierce, Buchanan, and Hayes were defeated for reelection, with those four choosing not to run, and all of these four, except Polk, very unpopular and aware that they were not wanted to be nominated for another term.

The usual viewpoint has been that James K. Polk, with the acquisition of the American Southwest by war with Mexico, and acquisition of the Pacific Northwest by the Oregon treaty with Great Britain, was the most successful one term President. Labeled an expansionist and an imperialist by many, the fact that he presided over the greatest expansion of US territory since Thomas Jefferson, has helped him to be regarded by scholars as a “successful” President, rated 12 to 14 in scholarly polls.

Now, some are saying that George H. W. Bush may be greater than Polk, due to his foreign policy accomplishments in particular, including the end of the Cold War, the unification of Germany, and the Persian Gulf War, along with his domestic policies of “A Thousand Points Of Light”, and the Americans With Disabilities Act.

Some on this list, including Van Buren, Pierce, Buchanan, Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, Taft, and Hoover are seen in a poor light, while J. Q. Adams is seen as not having succeeded in his one term, although a great man, and his father, John Adams, criticized for the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798, curbing civil liberties during his term.

The only other one term President who could be seen as competing would be Jimmy Carter, with his Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel, the Panama Canal Treaty, his Human Rights advocacy, his creation of new cabinet agencies (Departments of Education, Health And Human Services, Energy), and his exceptional record on the environment, but his negatives, including high inflation, the Iranian hostage crisis, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the Cuban Mariel Boat Lift all help to undermine his case.

So, one could argue that Polk and Bush may be competitive as the “best” one term elected President, without a clear cut answer to the question of who was the better President.

It might be best to say that Polk was the best 19th century one term elected President, while Bush was the best 20th century one term elected President, with Jimmy Carter as the runner up in that regard.

Hostile Relationship Of Former Presidents With Incumbent Presidents

Ronald Leave a comment

The question of the relationship of former Presidents with incumbent Presidents is an interesting one, with usually the former Presidents avoiding open criticism of their successors, even if they are of a different political persuasions, and did not support the nomination or election of their successors.

There are only a few cases of open criticism and attack, including:

John Quincy Adams highly critical of Andrew Jackson, and returning to Washington, DC as a Congressman to “keep watch” over his policies and actions. Adams was also a sharp critic of the slavery and expansionist policies of John Tyler and James K. Polk.

Martin Van Buren being a major critic of the expansionist policies of John Tyler and James K. Polk in the 1840s, and of the slavery policies of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan in the 1850s.

John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan all critical of the policies of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.

Grover Cleveland being a sharp critic of Benjamin Harrison, who he had lost to, and then ran against again and defeated in 1892, and then opposed William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt on the issue of imperialism and expansion.

Theodore Roosevelt very critical of his successor William Howard Taft, who he ran against on the Progressive Party line in 1912, and then against Woodrow Wilson’s policies toward World War I, after losing to him in 1912. Also, TR was resentful that Wilson “stole” some of his progressive ideas, and enacted them as President in his first term.

Herbert Hoover harshly critical of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s policies during the Great Depression and World War II.

Harry Truman very critical of Richard Nixon for years before he became President, and never really making peace even when Nixon gave the Truman library the piano in the White House that Truman had played. Also, Truman was critical of Dwight D. Eisenhower, and the two men only resolved their differences at the funeral of John F. Kennedy in 1963.

Jimmy Carter very critical of the policies of his successor, Ronald Reagan, and at times, of George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama.

Otherwise, the tendency has been to sit on the sidelines and avoid open criticism of one’s successors to the Oval Office!

Ten Other Presidential Elections That Transformed American History For Better Or Worse

Ronald Leave a comment

In addition to what are considered the ten most important Presidential elections in American history, there are also ten other elections that transformed our history, as history would have been different had the results been the opposite of what they were.

In chronological order, these elections are as follows.

Presidential Election of 1844—If James K. Polk had not won over Henry Clay, the likelihood of gaining the Pacific Northwest by treaty with Great Britain, and gaining the Southwest by war with Mexico, together the greatest land expansion since the Louisiana Purchase under Thomas Jefferson, would have been far less likely. But also the Civil War might have been delayed without the battle over freedom or slavery in the Mexican Cession territories gained from the war.

Presidential Election of 1864—An election often ignored, if Abraham Lincoln had not won over General George McClellan, who he had fired from Union Army military leadership, the Civil War, in its late stages, might have ended differently in some form, hard to determine.

Presidential Election of 1876—If the Electoral Commission and Compromise of 1877, giving Rutherford B. Hayes victory over Samuel Tilden, had not occurred, after a disputed election result in Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina, there might have been civil war erupting all over again.

Presidential Election Of 1896—If William McKinley had not defeated William Jennings Bryan, there might have been no Spanish American War, no Filipino Insurrection, and no gaining of overseas colonies, as Bryan opposed the idea.

Presidential Election Of 1916—If Woodrow Wilson had not squeaked out a victory over Charles Evans Hughes, he had readied plans to hand over the Presidency to Hughes early, with the Secretary of State resigning, Hughes being named Secretary of State, the Vice President resigning, and then Wilson resigning. Wilson left behind a hand written memorandum to this effect, concerned about the transition of power as the dangers of World War I came closer to the possibility of American participation.

Presidential Election Of 1928—If Herbert Hoover had lost to Alfred E. Smith, the likelihood of a very different reaction to the onset of the Great Depression in 1929 might have led Smith to being the equivalent of Hoover’s successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and his New Deal.

Presidential Election of 1968—If Hubert Humphrey had defeated Richard Nixon, it is likely that the Vietnam War would have ended earlier, and that there would not have been a Watergate scandal, and instead a continuation of the Great Society begun by Lyndon B. Johnson.

Presidential Election of 1976—If Gerald Ford had defeated Jimmy Carter, it is likely that after 12 years of Republican control and growing economic and foreign policy challenges, that the Democrats would have retaken the White House in 1980, and there would have been no Ronald Reagan Presidency.

Presidential Election Of 1992–If George H. W. Bush had not had to deal with an economic recession and the third party challenge of Ross Perot, the second highest popular percentage third party effort in US history, it is very likely that Bill Clinton would never have been President.

Presidential Election of 2000—If the popular vote recount in Florida had been continued, and the Supreme Court had not intervened to declare the election over, then Al Gore would have become President instead of George W. Bush, and there might not have been a September 11 terrorist attack, the resulting war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and likely not a tremendous growth in the national debt from $5 trillion to $10 trillion

How much history would have been different if only the results of these elections had been other than what they were!