Wendell Willkie

“Non Politicians”–Presidential Winners And A Few Presidential Nominees

Ronald Leave a comment

With three Republican Presidential candidates for 2016 being “non politicians”, people who have never served in a government position on the city, state or national level, the issue arises: have there been any other such candidates in the past?

It turns out that we have had several military generals who never served in a civilian position, that could qualify as “non politicians”.

This includes the following:

Zachary Taylor 1848 (Mexican War)

Winfield Scott 1852 (Mexican War)

George McClellan 1864 (Civil War)

Ulysses S. Grant 1868, 1872 (Civil War)

Winfield Scott Hancock 1880 (Civil War)

Taylor and Grant were elected, while Scott, McClellan, and Hancock were defeated in their attempts to become President.

McClellan did serve as Governor of New Jersey from 1878-1881, AFTER running for President against Abraham Lincoln.  But Taylor, Scott, Grant and Hancock never ran for public office.

Additionally, Horace Greeley, the New York Tribune publisher, ran for President in 1872, as the candidate of the Democratic Party and the breakaway group in the Republican Party opposed to Grant’s reelection, known as the “Liberal Republicans”.  He served very briefly as an appointed member of the House of Representatives, but not by vote of the people, but rather a choice of Whig Party leaders to fill a short term replacement before the election for the next term in Congress.  He served a total of only three months from December 1848 to March 1849, and did not run for the New York City seat.  Technically, one could say he had that political experience, but so little in time, that he could be seen as basically a “non politician” when he ran for President 24 years later, although being the editor of the New York Tribune was certainly “political” in nature.

Then we have Wall Street industrialist and businessman Wendell Willkie, who ran against Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940, after stirring the Republican National Convention and overcoming much better known Presidential candidates, but while running a good race, he lost, and then supported the World War II effort and cooperated with FDR until Willkie died in late 1944.

And finally, we have billionaire Ross Perot, who ran for President as an independent in 1992 and as the Reform Party candidate in 1996.

So only Zachary Taylor and Ulysses S. Grant were “non politicians” who were elected President.

The odds of Donald Trump, Carly Fiorina, or Dr. Benjamin Carson being elected President in 2016, therefore, are astronomical!

Donald Trump: A Mix Of Wendell Willkie, George Wallace, And Ross Perot

Ronald Leave a comment

Donald Trump’s Presidential candidacy has brought back memories of three other Presidential candidates.

First is Wendell Willkie, a corporate leader and Wall Street industrialist from Indiana who had never run for public office, who wowed the Republican convention in 1940 with his charisma, rhetoric, and attack on “career politicians”.  He was able to win the Republican Presidential nomination in 1940, and run a good but losing race against the master politician, Franklin D. Roosevelt, running for an unprecedented third term.

Next is George C. Wallace, Governor of Alabama, who formed the American Independent Party in 1968, rallying those opposed to the Civil Rights laws passed under Lyndon B. Johnson.  He attracted angry working class whites, and won 13.5 % of the popular vote, the fourth best percentage for a third party in American history.  He also won five Southern states and 46 electoral votes, making him the second best in total states and electoral votes in American history, only behind former President Theodore Roosevelt, who won six states and 88 electoral votes as the nominee of the third party known as the Progressive (Bull Moose) party, in 1912.  TR also is the only third party nominee to end up second, rather than third in the election results.  His campaign in 1912 decimated the Republican Party under President William Howard Taft, and helped to elect Democrat Woodrow Wilson.

And then we have Ross Perot, a billionaire businessman who had never run for public office, who ran an independent race twice, winning nearly 19 percent of the vote in 1992, and 8 percent of the vote in 1996, while winning no states in the Electoral College.  He appealed to those who were disgusted with the federal government, and worried about the growing national debt.  His candidacy undermined the Republican Party nominees, President George H. W. Bush in 1992 and Senator Bob Dole in 1996, and elected Democrat Bill Clinton twice.

Now we have Donald Trump, a billionaire, who has developed an appeal to those who are disillusioned with politics and the federal government, making him similar to Perot.  But Trump also appeals to the baser instincts in many people, those who dislike African Americans, Latinos, immigrants in general, in these ways having similar views  to Wallace.  These Trump supporters  also think women should not be treated equally, preferring the old image of women who should cook, clean, and be available for the sexual satisfaction of their men, but with no rights over their bodies and reproduction,  similar to the Tea Party Movement.  Also, there is a distaste for labor rights, and for the environment, and an orientation toward absolute belief in religion as the gospel, and a repudiation of science.

Can Trump “storm” the Republican Party, as Wendell Willkie did in 1940; or will he run on a third party, like Ross Perot, and make it impossible for the GOP to win the White House?  And will Trump continue to appeal to the George Wallace type voters, and promote a right wing populism as Wallace did?

This is what is yet to be evolving, but in many ways, Trump is a combination, right now, of Willkie, Wallace, and Perot!

Three Quirks Of Presidential Election History: 1872, 1912, 1940

Ronald 1 Comment

We are now fully in Presidential election season, with constant focus on the candidates and the issues.

But when one looks back to Presidential election history, one discovers so called “quirks” in the 1872, 1912, and particularly the 1940 presidential election cycles.

In 1872, President Ulysses S. Grant, seeking a second term, faced Democratic and “Liberal Republican” Presidential nominee Horace Greeley, the editor of the famous New York Tribune newspaper, which had had such a dramatic effect on the issue of slavery and the evolution of the Republican Party. Greeley had also promoted Abraham Lincoln’s nomination in 1860.

Greeley, who was quirky in his personal life, seen by many as an “oddball”, became the candidate of so called “Liberal Republicans” who did not like the policies and actions of the Grant Presidency.

Of course, Grant defeated him, but only 24 days later, before the Electoral College could meet and cast its official votes, Greeley died, marking the only time that a Presidential candidate died during or after an election campaign, but before the inauguration. To top off the tragedy, Greeley’s wife had died a week before the election, and therefore, Greeley died only 30 days after his wife had passed away. Imagine if Greeley had won over Grant, which would have necessitated his Vice Presidential running mate, Benjamin Gratz Brown, to become the President-elect!

In 1912, President William Howard Taft was in a three way race with former President Theodore Roosevelt on the Progressive (Bull Moose) Party line, and with Democratic nominee Woodrow Wilson, who would win the three way contest.

But six days before the election, Vice President James Sherman died in office, so when the Electoral College met, it was agreed that Columbia University President Nicholas Murray Butler would be substituted on the Electoral College ballot to receive the 8 electoral votes for Vice President that Taft received for President. This is the only time a sitting Vice President or even Vice Presidential candidate died during the election campaign or before the inauguration.

And in 1940, Businessman Wendell Willkie was nominated for President by the Republican Party to run against Franklin D. Roosevelt, seeking a third term in the White House. Senator Charles McNary of Oregon was chosen as Willkie’s running mate for Vice President.

FDR went on to win, but meanwhile, in an oddity, it turned out that McNary died in February 1944, and Willkie died in October 1944, therefore marking the only time that an entire Presidential ticket, luckily the losing one, failed to survive the term that they were competing to serve in. Luckily so for the nation, as that would have required the Secretary of State for Willkie to have taken over just before the 1944 election, and at a crucial time in World War II!

“Surprise” Presidential Nominees, And Often Winners, In American History

Ronald Leave a comment

As we are about to enter August, the year before the Presidential Election Of 2016, we find two “surprise” candidates doing very well, if one is to judge by crowds and public opinion polls.

Whether Donald Trump and or Bernie Sanders have a real chance to be the nominees of the Republican and Democratic parties is impossible to know this far ahead.

But in American history, there have been many surprise nominees, and or winners of the Presidency.

The examples of this phenomenon follow—17 Presidents and 6 Presidential nominees in 23 Presidential elections:

In 1844, James K. Polk was nominated by the Democrats on the 9th ballot, and went on to defeat the better known and more famous Henry Clay.

In 1848, Mexican War General Zachary Taylor, with no political experience, and no stands on political issues, was nominated by the Whig Party, and elected over Lewis Cass and Free Soil Party nominee, former President Martin Van Buren.

In 1852, little known Franklin Pierce was nominated by the Democrats on the 49th ballot, and went on to defeat famous Mexican War General Winfield Scott.

In 1860, one term Congressman Abraham Lincoln, not in public office in 12 years, was the choice of the Republican Party, and defeated Stephen Douglas, John C. Breckinridge, and John Bell.

In 1868, Ulysses S. Grant, Civil War Union Army hero, with no political experience, was nominated by the Republicans, and defeated Horatio Seymour.

In 1872, the Democrats and a fringe group known as the “Liberal Republicans” nominated well known journalist Horace Greeley, who had never served in public office, losing to President Grant.

In 1892, former President Grover Cleveland, who had lost reelection in 1888 to Benjamin Harrison, came back and defeated Harrison, becoming the only President to win, lose, and then win, and therefore, being listed as the 22nd and 24th Presidents of the United States.

In 1896, a former Nebraska Congressman, only 36 years old, William Jennings Bryan, inspired the Democratic convention and was nominated for President, but lost to William McKinley.

In 1904, an unknown (except in New York) state court judge, Alton B. Parker, was the Democratic nominee against Theodore Roosevelt, but lost.

In 1912, President of Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson, nominated on the 46th ballot by the Democrats, defeated President William Howard Taft, former President Theodore Roosevelt (running on the Progressive Party line), and Socialist Eugene Debs.

In 1920, an obscure Senator with no special accomplishments or credentials, Warren G. Harding, was nominated by the Republicans, and defeated Democratic nominee James Cox.

In 1924, the Democrats were deadlocked at their convention for 103 ballots, and finally nominated corporate attorney John W. Davis, who lost to President Calvin Coolidge and Progressive Party nominee Robert LaFollette, Sr.

In 1928, the Democrats nominated the first Catholic Presidential candidate, Alfred E. Smith, but he lost to Republican nominee Herbert Hoover.

In 1932, the Democrats nominated Franklin D. Roosevelt, who had been judged as having “no particular qualifications” for the Presidency, and he went on to defeat President Herbert Hoover.

In 1940, the Republicans nominated a businessman with no political experience, Wendell Willkie, after he inspired their convention, but he lost to President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

In 1948, President Harry Truman shocked the political world by winning a full term over Republican Thomas E. Dewey, States Rights nominee Strom Thurmond, and Progressive Party nominee, former Vice President Henry A. Wallace. He had been shown to be way behind Dewey in every political poll taken that year.

In 1952, a World War II general, Dwight D. Eisenhower, never having been involved in politics, was finally convinced to run for President, and defeated Democratic nominee Adlai E. Stevenson.

IN 1960, the second Catholic nominee for President, John F. Kennedy, was able to overcome the religion barrier, and be elected over Republican Richard Nixon, the well known and experienced Vice President under Eisenhower.

In 1968, former defeated Presidential candidate Richard Nixon came back eight years after having lost, and he won the Presidency over Hubert Humphrey and American Independent Party nominee George Wallace.

In 1976, a one term Governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, considered unknown to most and given little chance for the Democratic Presidential nomination, surprised everyone and was elected over President Gerald Ford.

In 1980, an aging two time candidate for President, Ronald Reagan, ended up winning the Republican nomination, and was elected over President Carter.

In 1992, despite a sex scandal, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton won the Democratic nomination, and was elected over President George H. W. Bush and Independent nominee Ross Perot, even with Bush having enjoyed a 91 percent public opinion poll rating during the Persian Gulf War 18 months earlier.

In 2008, an African American first term Senator, with an Islamic middle name of Hussein, Barack Obama, overcame former First Lady Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, and defeated Republican nominee John McCain for the Presidency.

So anything can happen in 2016, with further coverage of the upcoming election being resumed when the Iowa Caucuses take place on February 1.

Until then, this blogger will focus on the promotion of his new book on Presidential Assassinations and Threats. He will give information on the interviews that he will have on radio, tv/cable, the internet, and print media, so that my readers will have an opportunity to investigate my activities over the next six months.

When he has time, he will look at American political, diplomatic and constitutional history solely, as there is much fascinating material that can and should be discussed and analyzed. It will make a look at the future much more significant, as a result of the historical analysis of the Presidency, elections, political parties, the Congress, and the Supreme Court.

The Fox News-Republican Debate Of August 6—Which Ten Should Be In Debate?

Ronald 4 Comments

The Republican National Committee has put itself in a hole, by allowing Fox News Channel to limit the number of participants in the first GOP Presidential debate on August 6 to ten.

Yes, there are too many candidates, and now it looks as if it will be 17, not 16, with assurances that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, Ohio Governor John Kasich, and former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore will enter the race before that debate.

The whole concept of 17 candidates, unprecedented in American history, is absolutely crazy, but why should national public opinion polls decide this, rather than common sense, as to who is really qualified to be a potential President, based on experience and accomplishments?

So this blogger will now eliminate SEVEN of the 17 potential debate participants, on the grounds that they do not have the credentials to be President of the United States. This does not mean that the ten who are, on paper, qualified, SHOULD be President or be the nominee, but simply that they have better credentials to compete for the White House.

Former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore–out of office since 2002, not one chance in a thousand of being nominated.

Carly Fiorina—no government experience, failed in the corporate world, never has a non politician been elected, and only Wendell Willkie was ever nominated by a major party.

Dr. Benjamin Carson— a fantastic pediatric surgeon, but no government experience, and there is no chance he can be elected, and his statements are often totally loony.

Former New York Governor George Pataki—a moderate, probably the most moderate, but absolutely no chance of being the nominee of the 2015 Republican Party.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal—-the most low rated governor in public opinion polls, a true disaster, and not a chance of being the nominee.

Former Texas Governor Rick Perry—had a chance in 2012, came across as moronic, and has no chance, even with new glasses, to be the nominee.

Business Donald Trump–who has NO qualifications to be President, and no government experience, no chance to be the nominee, and is out to destroy the Republican brand to feed his ego.

So the “serious” candidates who SHOULD be allowed in the debate are:

Five Senators–4 in the Senate now (Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Lindsey Graham) and former Senator Rick Santorum.

Five Governors—3 in office now (Chris Christie, John Kasich, Scott Walker) and two former Governors (Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee)

Those who would object to this elimination of seven candidates have to answer the question: Do you REALLY believe any of the seven eliminated have ANY chance to be the nominee? Come on, get real!

The Clown Bus Group Of Republican Presidential Contenders: Part II: Those Without Government Experience

Ronald Leave a comment

A few days ago, we discussed five Republican Governors or former Governors, who are contending for the Republican Presidential nomination, and why they are horrible choices for the Presidency, and would demean the office.

Today, we will examine three Republican Presidential contenders, who have never held elected office or been a cabinet member or in the military:

Dr. Benjamin Carson, a pediatric neurosurgeon and African American, who has come across as totally loony in his statements and views, including saying ObamaCare is slavery, that Obama is like Adolf Hitler, and that Creationism is a scientific theory and Climate Change is not occurring. This is just the tip of the iceberg, and Carson is proving how ridiculous his candidacy is, and how he is simply running to gain attention for his tremendous ego, as he has zero chance of being the nominee of his party.

Former Chief Executive Officer of Hewlett Packard Carly Fiorina, the only Republican woman running for President, thinks she is more qualified than Hillary Clinton, but she was fired from HP, and lost a race for the Senate seat of Barbara Boxer in California in 2010 by a massive landslide. She is basing her campaign on attacking Hillary, but has no credentials to make her qualified for President, and has a reputation of being a nasty, privileged lady in her dealings with others. Her chances of being the GOP nominee are zero!

The inimitable egotist and braggart of all time, Donald Trump, is a disaster waiting to happen, having had four bankruptcies, three wives, and promoted controversial views on “Birtherism” of Barack Obama, and is a nativist, racist, misogynist, and homophobe. He is pure poison for the GOP, and has no chance of being the nominee, but wants attention all of the time.

Only two non government figures have ever run for President–Wendell Willkie, Republican nominee in 1940 against Franklin D. Roosevelt. Despite losing, he had more brains and talents than all three of these characters discussed above combined. Also, Ross Perot, ran as an Independent in 1992 and 1996, and helped elect Bill Clinton. He managed to win 19 percent of the popular vote, second best ever for a third party candidate, in 1992, and 8 percent in 1996.

Forget about any of these three being the GOP nominee, as it is NOT going to happen, and they just simply add to the Clown Bus of Republican Presidential contenders!

Carly Fiorina: The Republican Female Alternative To Hillary Clinton! No Match For Hillary Clinton!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Republicans have their obligatory woman candidate for President in former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, and hope to gain the women’s vote with her competing in the primaries.

Instead of Michele Bachmann, who anyone intelligent knew was more of a joke than anything else in the 2012 Presidential race, we have a woman who certainly has more brains, but not much else.

The odds of Carly Fiorina ending up on the national ticket in 2016 for President or Vice President are highly unlikely for many reasons, but one stands out—her lack of any political experience.

Were Carly Fiorina to become the Republican Presidential nominee, she would have to overcome the reality that she would be only the second Presidential nominee in history, after Republican Wendell Willkie in 1940, to be on a national ticket, not counting third party Presidential nominee Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996.

But there are more obstacles to overcome, such as her personality and her viewpoints on major issues.

Fiorina is not exactly Ms. Charming, and is actually extremely arrogant, snobby, elitist, with a sense of entitlement that borders on obnoxious. She thinks she is very smart, which she may be in the business world, but she wears it as she goes about her daily life, and it is not exactly appealing.

Fiorina comes across as someone who we cannot resist, as she says she is above 90 percent likely to run for President, quite an egotistical, insufferable statement, which makes one want to say: “OK, Carly, if that is the case, what are you waiting for then? Go ahead and announce!”

The fact is that Carly Fiorina made enemies as CEO of Hewlett Packard, made many enemies in the corporate world, and would be very hard to work with, as she thinks she has all of the answers to everything, and that we are blessed to be in her presence. She was so “popular” that she was fired from Hewlett-Packard, and given a “golden parachute” upon leaving, making her extremely wealthy, and therefore, totally unconcerned about other women who are not as fortunate as her! She has been rated one of the ten worst CEOs ever in American history, making many enemies and critics.

Carly Fiorina showed her true nature when she ran for the Senate in California against Barbara Boxer in 2010, losing by ten points. And she has now shown her true lack of concern for the drought issue in California, by stating it is not part of climate change, but simply the result of “liberal environmentalists’ who have harmed industrial development while working to save endangered species, a totally outrageous, asinine statement. She had accepted big contributions from both oil and coal industry lobbyists during her Senate campaign, and takes the typical Republican view on most issues.

Fiorina has gone on the attack against Hillary Clinton with relish, but it is clear that while Hillary Clinton has faults, her record of experience and abilities far surpasses Carly Fiorina in every measurement.

So let’s just say, Carly Fiorina is no match for Hillary Clinton!

The CPAC Convention: Display Of Delusional Thinking And A Comedy Of Would Be Presidents!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland this weekend has been a revelation of delusional thinking, as well as a comedy of Would Be Presidents!

A conference that has Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, both supposed candidates for the White House, but just wanting attention, makes it worthy of ridicule from the beginning.

A conference that has elected Rand Paul as their favorite in a straw poll three years in a row, when there is zero chance of his being the Republican nominee, is a conference not worthy of any more attention, other than how Saturday Night Live treats it for laughs.

A conference that has a candidate, Scott Walker, who compares marchers for retention of labor rights to the fighting of terrorism is a conference that is clueless and insulting of the vast majority of America’s population, which are workers, not corporate leaders.

A conference that has retreads such as Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, and Rick Perry desperately trying to get notice and to make themselves relevant is quite pitiful.

A conference that has two totally inexperienced candidates, Dr. Benjamin Carson and corporate leader Carly Fiorina, thinking they should be President, when we have never had a President or Presidential candidate with no political experience on the ballot, except for Wendell Willkie in 1940, is a sign of how little the people involved in this conference understand reality in a complex world.

A conference that allows propagandists who claim to be journalists, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, to be the interviewers of Presidential candidates, making them totally lacking in any credibility, is a conference that should be seen as something not worthy of serious consideration.

A conference that demonstrates intolerance toward women, immigrants, minorities, and gays and lesbians is a conference that has no desire to unite the American people, but rather to divide them, and fail to recognize the impending changes in the population long term, that dooms their agenda!

Mitt Romney Fighting History, And Common Sense, By His Stated Plan To Run For President Again!

Ronald 2 Comments

Mitt Romney has a massive ego, a sense of divine direction, a belief in himself as the only person who can move America forward!

What else can explain why the losing Republican Presidential nominee in 2012 is telling his supporters that he intends to run for President once again?

What can Mitt Romney say or do which will change our view of him, a view of a chameleon, with no principles, no convictions, no ethics, except to advance himself, despite being one of the wealthiest people ever to run for President, and having no real need to be President, except he wants to be President!

Mitt Romney is NOT going to be the 2016 GOP nominee, and trying to run to the right of Jeb Bush is a guaranteed lost cause, as there are more than enough true right wingers available, so why should he expect to beat out the likes of Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, or Rick Perry, among others?

Romney does not even offer the idea of greater experience in public office, as he had the least such experience in American history, with the exception of Woodrow Wilson and Wendell Willkie, who had two years and no years of public government experience, as compared to Romney’s one term as Massachusetts Governor, but eager to run for President even as he just began his Governorship!

Romney has run two Presidential races, and lost one, and the list of Presidents who have lost and then won is small indeed.

It includes Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, William Henry Harrison, Grover Cleveland, and Richard Nixon.

All five had much more experience in government and or the military (in the case of Jackson and Harrison) than Mitt Romney.

Face the facts: Romney is NOT Thomas Jefferson; Romney is NOT Andrew Jackson; Romney is NOT Grover Cleveland; and most certainly, Romney is NOT Richard Nixon, who had broad experience and expertise. The Harrison comparison does not matter, as Harrison only served one month as President in 1841.

The best thing Mitt Romney could do is continue doing what he does best: making money faster than one can say one-two-three, as he is not going to be able to outlive his failure to run a decent, honest campaign, and he will NOT be the next Richard Nixon!

George W. Bush Promotes Brother Jeb For President!

Ronald Leave a comment

We have had two Bush Presidencies, but now George W. Bush is promoting his younger brother, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, to run for President in 2016!

Jeb Bush would be seen as part of the Establishment Republicans, not a popular group in the extreme right wing Tea Party Movement that has hijacked the traditions of the Republican Party historically.

Jeb is not nativist like many Republicans on immigration; after all, his own wife is Mexican-American!

Jeb has never gone as far to the right as many Republicans do today, and that makes him suspect among them.

And of course, there is exhaustion over the concept of a third Bush Presidency, after twelve years of Bushes in the past 26 years, with only Bill Clinton between them, and if Jeb became President, with only Barack Obama between the two sons of George H. W. Bush.

Jeb would be a mainstream, rational choice for President, but that is not the bent of the GOP of 2014.

And Jeb has NOT been running for public office since his second gubernatorial run in 2002, and will have been out of office for ten years, by the Presidential Election of 2016. And no one ever elected President has been out of public office as long as Jeb will have been, other than those who were generals, or businessman Wendell Willkie in 1940, with the one other exception being Abraham Lincoln, who had been out of public office for 12 years when elected to the Presidency in 2016!

Jeb would bring intelligence, knowledge, and competence to the White House, much more than his brother George W. had in 2000.

But he also represents the past, and is very likely to cater to the right wing, and most certainly, would NOT be a progressive oriented President, anymore than his brother or dad.

The odds of Jeb deciding to run should be seen as 40 percent, and the chances of being the nominee is more like 30 percent, and the odds of being elected would be no more than 45 percent.

The best guess is that Jeb will decide, ultimately, NOT to run, as his own wife seems reluctant, and that is an important factor in any candidate’s decision to run.

Imagine though a scenario of Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton. Would that encourage voters to stay home or to come out in droves to vote? More likely, the latter!