Thomas E. Dewey

The Decline Of The New York State Government And Governorship!

New York State, the “Empire State”, is a victim of government decline in so many ways.

This was the state that gave us Presidential candidates in Alfred E. Smith, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Thomas E. Dewey, and potential Presidential candidates in Averell Harriman, Nelson Rockefeller, Mario Cuomo, and George Pataki.

But now, we have had Eliot Spitzer, forced out of office by a sex scandal, and Andrew Cuomo, subject of an ethics investigation, who has displayed arrogance and entitlement about his control of who can investigate him, which has now blown up in his face.

Ironically, Cuomo seems an easy winner for his second term, but could be forced out of office during the next term, reminiscent of the circumstances of President Richard Nixon, who won easy reelection while under investigation, and then was forced to resign in disgrace.

This will end any hope that Cuomo could ever run for the Presidency, if for instance, Hillary Clinton chose not to run.

Having said that as reality, this author wishes to state that he has always had an uneasy feeling about Cuomo, over many years. It is something hard to pinpoint, but this blogger always liked Mario Cuomo, Andrew’s dad, but never felt comfortable with his son, even though he resembles him a lot in speaking manner and appearance!

Multiple Losing Presidential Candidacies, And Those Who Lost, Then Won The Presidency

The history of multiple candidacies for the Presidency is an interesting one, with five candidates being nominated more than once and losing each time, and five candidates being nominated more than once, and losing before winning the White House (with unusual circumstances for Grover Cleveland)

Those who ran multiple times and continued to lose are:

Charles Pinckney, Presidential Elections of 1804 and 1808
Henry Clay, Presidential Elections of 1824, 1832, and 1844
William Jennings Bryan, Presidential Elections Of 1896, 1900, and 1908
Thomas E. Dewey, Presidential Elections of 1944 and 1948
Adlai Stevenson, Presidential Elections of 1952 and 1956

Those who ran multiple times and first lost, and then won the Presidency are (with unusual case of Grover Cleveland described below):

Thomas Jefferson, Presidential Elections of 1796, 1800 and 1804
Andrew Jackson, Presidential Elections of 1824, 1828 and 1832
William Henry Harrison, Presidential Elections of 1836 and 1840
Grover Cleveland, Presidential Elections of 1884, 1888, and 1892 (winning in 1884, losing in 1888, winning in 1892)
Richard Nixon, Presidential Elections of 1960, 1968 and 1972

Also, Jackson and Cleveland won the popular vote in the elections they lost in the Electoral College, so both actually won the popular vote three times, the only candidates to do that, other than Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won the popular vote and electoral vote four times, in the Presidential Elections of 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944!

Additionally, Martin Van Buren ran a third time in 1848 on the Free Soil Party line and lost; and Theodore Roosevelt ran a second time in 1912 on the Progressive Party line and lost.

The Dominance Of Political Family Dynasties

It now seems clear that Hillary Clinton will be running for the Presidency, and that she is very likely to become the 45th President of the United States, and its first woman President.

Every poll imaginable shows her far in the lead against any Democratic challenger, including Vice President Joe Biden, who is the only other Democrat to even score more than a couple of percent in any poll, but about 50-60 points behind the former First Lady, former Senator, and former Secretary of State.

And every poll also shows that NO Republican comes anywhere near Hillary Clinton, with the only one who seemed to compete, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, rapidly collapsing in the midst of the “Bridgegate ” and associated scandals, with the issue of funding of projects with federal money for Hurricane Sandy the more dangerous scandal for Christie and his future.

Hillary Clinton enters the 2016 campaign almost as if she was an incumbent, and really, no one has ever been in as enviable a position as she seems to be. But this means that she must not take anything for granted, run hard and vigorously and not assume victory as Republican nominee Thomas E. Dewey thought in 1948, before he lost in an upset victory by President Harry Truman.

Hillary Clinton must be able and willing to take as much flak and attacks on everything imaginable in her record and life story, and she does seem to be tough enough to deal with that, plus the inevitable death threats which will be visited upon her at a rate probably at least equivalent to Abraham Lincoln, and possibly at the same astronomical rate of President Barack Obama, who faces, approximately, 30 death threats in some form per day!

Many might think that a person who will be 69 and three months of age at the time of the inauguration, making her the second oldest inaugurated President in American history, after Ronald Reagan, who was about eight months older at his first inauguration, would think twice about spending the next ten years of her life, until age 77 and three months, if she served two complete terms, with the pressure cooker and stresses of running for President, and dealing with an increasingly complex and troubled world and nation. But she seems game for the challenge, and would certainly come into office more experienced and better equipped for the Presidency than almost any occupant of the Oval Office we have seen.

But her likely accession to the Presidency, with the full team support and financial backing of many Obama Administration and campaign functionaries, is a true sign that Vice President Joe Biden should give up the quest for the White House, as he is about five years older, and would be the oldest first term President, and if he were to serve two terms, would be past 82 at the end. This author is a great Joe Biden fan, but it does seem time for party unity, in the midst of Republican chaos and anarchy, for him to accept reality, and as soon as Hillary Clinton announces, to be gracious and announce he will not challenge her for the nomination.

There is no likelihood of any Democrat bothering to challenge her, particularly if Biden drops out, and the long range shot by former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer would only be like a Don Quixote battling a windmill!

If Hillary Clinton succeeds in her quest, she will have made the Clinton dynasty the most dominant in modern American history, without any debate. Consider that her husband, Bill Clinton affected the nation from the time he ran in 1992 until he left in 2001, followed by Hillary as Senator from New York for eight years, and then four years as Secretary of State, making for a total of 21 years, now followed by two years in private life, but ten years into the future of campaigning, and possible two terms in the Presidency, which would make for a grand total of 31 years of national influence. And even these two years of private life, Hillary Clinton remains a national figure of great respect and renown, so one could say 33 years, a third of a century, the Clintons may have been the dominant influence in American history–between 1992 and 2025!

The dominance of the Clintons is only matched recently by the Bushes, with father George H. W. on the political radar from his 1980 challenge to Ronald Reagan until his forced retirement in 1993, after losing to Bill Clinton. Then, his son George W. came on the scene as Texas Governor in 1995 and son Jeb as Florida Governor starting in 1999. When George W. ran in 2000, and then won two terms, leaving in 2009, it meant a total of 14 years of senior Bush, followed by 14 years of junior Bush, for a total of 28 years. Ironically, if Jeb were now to run, which his mother does not advise him to do, and which Speaker of the House John Boehner thinks he should do, and were he to win, he could surpass the potential Clinton family record!

Compared to the Clintons and the Bushes, no other family dominates, as the Kennedy generation of John and Robert only lasted 8 years, and after Ted Kennedy lost his only real chance for the Presidency in 1980 against Jimmy Carter in the primaries, it meant a total of maybe 20 years of Kennedy dominance, although Ted did stay as an influential Senator until his death in 2009.

The only other family worthy of mention are the Roosevelts, if one counts Teddy and Franklin as part of the same dynasty, although different parties and generations completely. But even TR and FDR were only dominant for a total of 20 years combined, although TR remained a national figure for the ten years after his Presidency until his death.

It would certainly be ironic if we ended up with Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush opposing each other in 2016, as a battle of the titans, the two families who have more dominated American politics than any other in American history!

Losing Major Party Presidential Nominees And Their Futures: A Summary

Losing Presidential nominees usually go on to a future public career, with a few exceptions.

William Jennings Bryan, three time nominee in 1896, 1900, and 1908, went on to become Secretary of State for two years under President Woodrow Wilson.

Alton B Parker, the losing candidate in 1904, went on to become temporary chairman and keynote speaker at the 1912 Democratic National Convention.

Charles Evans Hughes, the losing nominee in 1916, went on to become Secretary of State under Presidents Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court under Presidents Herbert Hoover and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

James Cox, the losing nominee in 1920, built up a newspaper empire, Cox Enterprises, which would become very influential in the world of journalism, and still is, as the publisher of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and the Palm Beach Post, as well as cable television and internet enterprises under his heirs.

John W. Davis, the losing 1924 nominee, had a distinguished career as a lawyer who argued cases before the Supreme Court, including being in the losing side of the famous school integration case, Brown V. Board Of Education Of Topeka, Kansas in 1954, and the Youngstown Steel Case of 1952, ruling against President Truman’s seizure of the steel mills during the Korean War. He was on the side opposing school integration and Presidential power, being a true Jeffersonian conservative throughout his life.

Alfred E. Smith, the 1928 losing nominee, became head of the corporation which built the Empire State Building in 1931, and was an active opponent of Franklin D.Roosevelt and his New Deal.

Al Landon, the losing 1936 nominee, spoke up on foreign policy issues as World War II came on, but spent his life in the oil industry, playing a very limited role in public life after the war.

Wendell Willkie, the losing 1940 nominee, proceeded to write a book about his vision of the postwar world, and was thinking of running again in 1944, but died early in that year.

Thomas E. Dewey, the losing nominee in 1944 and 1948, continued to serve as Governor of New York, and was a power player in the Republican Party after his time in office.

Adlai Stevenson, the 1952 and 1956 losing nominee, went on to serve as United Nations Ambassador under Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson.

Barry Goldwater, the losing 1964 nominee, went back to the US Senate, and served three more terms in office.

Hubert Humphrey, the losing 1968 nominee, went back to the Senate and served seven more years in that body.

George McGovern, the losing 1972 nominee, went on to serve eight more years in the US Senate, and kept active in work for the United Nations in various agencies.

Walter Mondale, the losing nominee in 1984, went on to serve as Ambassador to Japan under President Bill Clinton.

Michael Dukakis, the losing nominee in 1988, went back to two more years as Governor of Massachusetts, and also has served as a professor at various institutions, including Northeastern University and Florida Atlantic University.

Bob Dole, the losing 1996 nominee, has engaged in much public activity, including fighting hunger with fellow former nominee George McGovern, and is seen as an elder statesman who is greatly respected.

Al Gore, the losing 2000 nominee, went on to become an advocate for action on climate change and global warming, and also created the cable channel called CURRENT.

John Kerry, the losing 2004 nominee, has continued his distinguished career in the Senate, and may be tapped to join President Obama’s cabinet as Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense.

John McCain, the losing 2008 nominee, has continued his career in the Senate, being last reelected to a six year term in 2010.

The question is what, if any role, Mitt Romney will have in public life, with no hint at this point that he intends any, even after his White House meeting this week with President Barack Obama.

Mitt Romney Destined To Be Forgotten In History As Have Been Alton B. Parker, James Cox, John W. Davis, And Alf Landon

Only actual historians, who love to study trivia as part of their trade, have a real memory of numerous Presidential candidates who lost, including Alton B. Parker, who lost to Theodore Roosevelt in 1904; James Cox, who lost to Warren G. Harding in 1920; John W. Davis, who lost to Calvin Coolidge in 1924; and Alf Landon, who lost to Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1936.

But it seems that Mitt Romney, who lost to Barack Obama in the 2012 Presidential Election, will be quickly forgotten, with his Republican Party quickly repudiating him, and him distancing himself from them, and seen as a bad nightmare, who should never have been nominated in the first place.

His impact on the party will be very little, and he will not be in public office again, similar to the four men mentioned earlier.

He is not going to be a public figure such as William Jennings Bryan, Charles Evans Hughes, Alfred E. Smith, Wendell Willkie, Thomas E. Dewey, Adlai Stevenson, Barry Goldwater, Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry, and John McCain proved to be.

So goodbye to Mitt Romney in public life!

Gallup Vs. Nate Silver: Who Is Reliable In Prediction Of Presidential Race?

Here we are a week out from the election, and the public opinion polls and prognosticators are driving everyone nuts, with contradictory views and statistics as to whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney will be elected next week.

The Gallup polls have projected Romney as ahead by five points in some polls, and other polls have shown a tight race, almost even.

Meanwhile, Nate Silver of the NY TIMES, considered the master of political polling science, says that Barack Obama has about a 73 percent chance of winning, particularly in regard to the “swing states”, showing him ahead in all but North Carolina and Florida, and a tossup in Colorado and Virginia.

But leaving North Carolina, Florida, Colorado and Virginia out of the mix for Obama, that still means he is favored in New Hampshire, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin and Nevada, and will win 295 electoral votes, 24 more than is needed to win the Presidency.

So this leaves us in a quandary!

Who do we trust or believe in? Nate Silver or the Gallup Polls, or other polls?

Remember, the Gallup polls were totally wrong in 1948, predicting a victory for Thomas E. Dewey over Harry Truman!

But, of course, that was 64 years ago, a long time, with much improvement and proof of reliability of Gallup much of the time!

On the other hand, the last time we had such a stiff, awkward, hard to relate to, Governor of a Northeastern state who had been born in Michigan, before Mitt Romney was, indeed, Dewey in 1948!

Hmmm, that is food for thought!

A Chicago Tribune “Dewey Defeats Truman” Moment: An Embarrassment to CNN, Fox News Channel And National Public Radio!

Electronic journalism did not have a great moment this past Thursday, when two cable channels, Fox News Channel and CNN, and National Public Radio as well, botched the first report of the Supreme Court decision on “ObamaCare”, declaring the plan had been declared unconstitutional!

It was a startling blunder, particularly for CNN and NPR, as Fox News Channel is infamous for distorting news on a regular basis!

A tremendous embarrassment it is, which will not give confidence to news junkies, while at the same time, MSNBC got it correct from the first moment, so let us salute MSNBC for its accuracy!

This whole situation reminds us of the Chicago Tribune headline in 1948, declaring GOP nominee Thomas E. Dewey the winner over President Harry Truman, leading to a photograph of Truman holding up the newspaper headline and beaming in victory, a priceless moment in American history!

Will Mitt Romney Select A Governor As Running Mate? Highly Unlikely!

As the speculation about who Mitt Romney will pick as his running mate picks up, it seems clear that, despite some hints, it is highly unlikely that he will select a Governor or former Governor as his Vice Presidential choice.

The last time that two Governors ran on a Presidential ticket together was 1948, when NY Governor Thomas E. Dewey ran with California Governor Earl Warren, losing to President Harry Truman.

Also, in 1944, Dewey had run against Franklin D. Roosevelt and lost, with Governor John Bricker of Ohio as his Vice Presidential choice.

Those are the only times in the 20th century that two Governors ran together, with the choice otherwise usually being a Senator running as the Vice Presidential choice of a Governor.

So do not expect New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, or former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty to be the choice of Mitt Romney!

May 8th:67 Years Since V-E Day, And 128th Birthday Of A Courageous President, Harry Truman!

Today marks two significant events in American history!

It is the 67th anniversary of V-E Day, the end of the war in Europe against Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany in 1945.

It is also the 128th anniversary of the birth of President Harry Truman, who took over the Presidency suddenly, less than a month before the end of the war in Europe and his birthday, and always stood out, through crisis after crisis, as a man of courage, guts, decisiveness and principle, not much appreciated at the time, or in retirement, but now seen as usually the fifth best President, trailing only Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, George Washington, and Theodore Roosevelt.

These are important historical events to commemorate, as we face a campaign in which the nation is more divided than it has ever been since a time of great unity in 1945,

And we have a candidate for President, Barack Obama, who can be compared in courage and decisiveness in foreign policy to President Truman; and with Obama’s opponent, Mitt Romney, easy to compare in so many ways to Truman’s opponent in 1948, Thomas E. Dewey, who came across as plastic, not liked by conservatives in the Republican Party, lacking in dynamism and charisma, and lacking strong principles.

Hopefully, the Dewey defeat in 1948 will be matched by a Romney defeat in 2012!

“Cool” Vs. “Stiff” Presidential Candidates: The Vote Goes To The “Cool’ Candidate Eighty Percent Of Presidential Elections Since 1932!

One aspect of the battle for the Presidency over time, particularly in the age of modern media and national campaigning, is the personality of the candidates, and whether a person running for the Presidency is “cool” or “stiff” with people.

When one investigates this from the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 onward, in most cases, but not all, the “cool” , more personable, candidate wins.

This happened with FDR against Herbert Hoover in 1932, against Alf Landon in 1936, against Wendell Willkie in 1940, and against Thomas E. Dewey in 1944.

It also occurred with Harry Truman against Dewey in 1948; Dwight D. Eisenhower against Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and 1956, and John F. Kennedy against Richard Nixon in 1960.

1964 was a rare year, where Barry Goldwater seemed more personable by far than Lyndon B . Johnson, but the Johnson campaign successfully depicted Goldwater as dangerous and extremist.

In 1968, Hubert Humphrey was certainly more gregarious and warm than Richard Nixon or George Wallace, but still lost, due to the Democratic split over the VIetnam War; and in 1972, George McGovern came across as more trustworthy and personable than Richard Nixon, but was depicted as extremist and radical in a way similar to Goldwater eight years earlier.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter, a new face on the scene, came across as more personable than Gerald Ford, who seemed stiff and uncomfortable to many.

By 1980, Ronald Reagan easily came across to Americans in a more charming manner than Jimmy Carter, and Walter Mondale never could overcome the Reagan mystique in 1984.

In 1988, neither George H. W. Bush nor Michael Dukakis came across as personable, the only time in modern history that such a situation existed.

In 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton easily came across much better in personality than Bush or Bob Dole.

George W. Bush definitely had the edge in his personality in 2000 and 2004 against Al Gore and John Kerry.

And Barack Obama had a clear advantage over John McCain in 2008, and certainly has that edge as well against Mitt Romney in 2012.

In conclusion, only Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon were the less personable candidate when they ran in 1964, 1968, and 1972, and only in 1988 could it be said there was no difference between George H. W. Bush and Michael Dukakis in the level of their “coolness”.

The conclusion is that the more personable or “cool” candidate has a clear edge in the modern era in being elected to the Presidency!