William Henry Harrison

Back To The Future: Mitt Romney In 2016?

Ronald 3 Comments

The Republican Party is so torn apart that now there are rumors and hints that 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts, is reconsidering his decision not to run again, due to the collapse of the so called “Establishment” Republicans, led by former Governor Jeb Bush.

Bush has run a poor campaign, despite all of the money he has gathered, and there are indications that he is starting to be abandoned, as Donald Trump continues to take up all of the oxygen in the Republican race.

While Ohio Governor John Kaisch has made some progress in his campaign, he is far from being seen as anywhere near becoming a leader in the competition for the Presidency, and Florida Senator Marco Rubio has not impressed many in his quest for the nomination.

So Romney may decide to enter the race, but still with the same shortcomings and faults that caused his defeat by President Barack Obama in 2012.

To believe that Romney could, somehow, win the Presidency in 2016 is mostly hype and delusion.

The question arises:  How many times has a defeated Presidential candidate come back to win the Presidency?  Here are the facts, a total of 5 times:

Thomas Jefferson lost the Presidency in 1796 and won in 1800.

Andrew Jackson lost the Presidency in 1824 and won in 1828.

William Henry Harrison lost the Presidency in 1836 and won in 1840.

Grover Cleveland lost the Presidency in 1888 and won in 1892.

Richard Nixon lost the Presidency in 1960 and won in 1968.

That is it, five Presidents, but realize that Jackson and Cleveland actually won the popular vote in their losing races in 1824 and 1888, but lost the electoral vote, and Cleveland had been President, then lost, and then won.

Of course, there have been 4 times when a future President lost the nomination of his party, and then went on to win the Presidency later, including:

James Monroe lost the nomination in 1808 to James Madison, but then won the Presidency in 1816.

Lyndon B. Johnson lost the nomination in 1960 to John F. Kennedy, but then became President by succession in 1963.

Ronald Reagan lost the nomination in 1976 to Gerald Ford, but then won the Presidency in 1980.

George H. W. Bush lost the nomination in 1980 to Ronald Reagan, but then won the Presidency in 1988.

At the same time, there have been 5 candidates nominated multiple times and never winning the Presidency, as follows:

Charles C. Pinckney won the nomination in 1804 and 1808.

Henry Clay won the nomination in 1824, 1832, and 1844.

William Jennings Bryan won the nomination in 1896, 1900, and 1908.

Thomas E. Dewey won the nomination in 1944 and 1948.

Adlai E. Stevenson II won the nomination in 1952 and 1956.

Also being on the ballot for President multiple times were Socialist Party nominees Eugene V. Debs (1900, 1904, 1908, 1912, 1920) and Norman Thomas (1928, 1932, 1936, 1940, 1944, 1948) and Ross Perot (Independent in 1992 and Reform Party in 1996).

In any case, the odds that Romney, if he ran for President, would become the Republican nominee and win the Presidency are very poor!

 

 

 

Likelihood Of Oldest Presidential Candidate Race Ever In American History!

Ronald 6 Comments

As the 2016 Presidential campaign heats up, it looks more and more likely that the two major party nominees will be among the oldest ever nominated or elected.

The Democrats have the following candidates who will be 64 or even beyond 70 as possible nominees:

Hillary Clinton 69
Joe Biden 74
Bernie Sanders 75
Jim Webb 70 (but nearly 71)
Lincoln Chafee 63 (but nearly 64)

The Republicans have the following candidates who will be 64 or beyond as possible nominees:

Jeb Bush 63 (but nearly 64)
Donald Trump 70
John Kasich 64
Rick Perry 66 (but nearly 67)
Jim Gilmore 67
George Pataki 71
Dr Benjamin Carson 65

Between the likely Democratic nominee and the likely Republican nominee, we can expect the oldest combination of Presidential candidates if one for each group above are the chosen nominees.

Right now, the Democratic nominee seems likely to be one of the top three on the list–Clinton, Biden or Sanders; and the Republican nominee likely to be one of the top three on that list—Bush, Trump, Kasich.

However, IF the Republican nominee turns out to be the younger candidates, such as Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, Scott Walker, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, or Marco Rubio, we could have a bigger difference in age than we have rarely had, with only vast differences in age of William McKinley and William Jennings Bryan in 1896 and 1900; Franklin D. Roosevelt and Thomas E. Dewey in 1944; Harry Truman and Dewey in 1948; Ronald Reagan and Walter Mondale in 1984; Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush in 1992; Clinton and Bob Dole in 1996; Barack Obama and John McCain in 2008; and Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012.

Note that in the cases of a much older and much younger opponents, the older candidate won with McKinley, FDR, Truman, and Reagan, but the younger candidate won with Clinton twice and Obama twice.

If Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee or Lindsey Graham were the GOP nominee, the average age of the two opponents would still be close to the highest in history, with their average age in the low 60s at inauguration.

Remember that the only Presidents to be 64 or older at inauguration were Ronald Reagan, William Henry Harrison, James Buchanan, George H. W. Bush, and Zachary Taylor.

The only other Presidents over the age of 60 at inauguration were:

Dwight D. Eisenhower
Andrew Jackson
John Adams
Gerald Ford
Harry Truman

So only 10 Presidents out of 43 were 60 or older when taking the oath, while now we are very likely to have both candidates over the age of 60, with 11 out of 17 Republican candidates being over 60, and 5 out of 6 (Martin O’Malley the exception) of the Democratic candidates over the age of 60.

So while we had a “new generation of leadership” three times in the past half century with John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, now we are almost certain to have an “old generation” of leadership coming to power on January 20, 2017.

Jeb Bush A Return To George W. Bush, Not George H. W. Bush! Therefore, Unacceptable To Be The Next President!

Ronald 1 Comment

The Bush Family has contributed two members to the Presidency, and in so doing, being one of three families to have done that—with the others being the Adamses (John Adams and John Quincy Adams), and the Harrisons (William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison).

But the two Adams Presidencies lasted one term each, and the two Harrison Presidencies lasted one month and one term.

The Bushes lasted four and eight years, and the first Bush Presidency is rated much higher than the second Bush Presidency, particularly in foreign policy, but also in domestic policy.

So if former Florida Governor Jeb Bush was to say that he would follow the lead of his father, that would be one thing.

But instead, Jeb makes clear now that he would follow the foreign policy of his brother over his father, and calls his brother his major foreign policy advisor.

Jeb also makes clear that the neoconservatives who advised his brother would be his key foreign policy team if he was to be elected President.

Based on these facts, Jeb Bush is, therefore, unacceptable to be the next President, as his brother is ranked in the bottom sixth of the Presidents, at number 36 out of 42, in the C Span poll of 2009.

It is one thing to have a disastrous Presidency in so many ways, but it is something else to decide that we would go down the same direction once again, so Jeb has lost his credibility to be the third Bush Presidency!

American Presidents And The Institution Of Slavery

Ronald Leave a comment

Yesterday, the author was watching the reenactment of the funeral of Abraham Lincoln in Springfield, Illinois, on C Span 3–American History TV, and the question has arisen, while watching the event, of the truth about America’s Presidents and the institution of slavery.

It turns out, through further research, that more Presidents than once thought, owned slaves in their lifetime, and that others showed lack of concern about the institution, and compromised on it in their Presidencies.

So it turns out that 12 of the first 18 Presidents owned slaves, including

George Washington
Thomas Jefferson–some expressed discomfort in his writings, but sill benefited from the institution
James Madison—some expressed discomfort in his writings, but still benefited from the institution
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
Martin Van Buren
William Henry Harrison
John Tyler
James K. Polk
Zachary Taylor
Andrew Johnson
Ulysses S. Grant.

Additionally, three Presidents, all Northerners, referred to as “doughfaces”, who went along with the institution through their actions, also supported continuation of slavery, including

Millard Fillmore–the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850
Franklin Pierce–the Kansas Nebraska Act of 1854
James Buchanan–support of the Dred Scott Supreme Court Case, and the Kansas LeCompton Constitution of 1857

It should be pointed out that Martin Van Buren had a few slaves at one point through family members but not while being President, but defended the institution while in office, and theh later had a change of heart, and ran as the Free Soil Party candidate for President in 1848, at that point opposing slavery,

Also, James Buchanan, technically, owned one slave for a brief period of time through his family, but not while President.

The same holds for Andrew Johnson and Ulysses S. Grant, ownership of slaves through family at some point, but neither while President. Grant, in particular, felt uncomfortable about the slavery heritage of his wife’s family.

The point is that only THREE Presidents always condemned slavery and worked against it

John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Abraham Lincoln

JQ Adams was extremely active against slavery, participating in the Amistad Supreme Court Case of 1839-1841 as one of the lawyers defending the slaves on that slave ship, in their bid for freedom, and sponsoring the move to condemn slavery in the House of Representatives, in his years after the Presidency. While a member of the House from Boston, he was censured for fighting the “gag rule”, which forbade discussion of the institution in House debate from 1836-1844. He also opposed the Mexican War as a war for slavery expansion.

American Presidents And Wealth Estimates In 2015!

Ronald 2 Comments

An update on the net worth of America’s Presidents, their total wealth at time of death, or for the living Presidents, what it is as of 2015, including inflation as a factor, reveals the following:

John F. Kennedy was the wealthiest President, worth within the range of $125 million to possibly $1 billion!

Due to this uncertain range, George Washington might be the wealthiest at $525 million.

The other Presidents over $100 million in net worth are:

Thomas Jefferson $212 million

Theodore Roosevelt $125 million

Andrew Jackson $119 million

James Madison $101 million

Five Presidents over $50 million up to $98 million include:

Lyndon B. Johnson $98 million

Herbert Hoover $75 million

Franklin D. Roosevelt $60 million

Bill Clinton $55 million

John Tyler $51 million

The next six Presidents are worth between $20 million and $27 million, as follows:

James Monroe $27 million

Martin Van Buren $26 million

Grover Cleveland $25 million

George H. W. Bush $23 million

John Quincy Adams $21 million

George W. Bush $20 million

The next five Presidents are worth $10 million to $19 million, as follows:

John Adams $19 million

Richard Nixon $15 million

Ronald Reagan $13 million

Barack Obama $12 million

James K. Polk $10 million

The next ten Presidents are worth between $2 million and $8 million, as follows:

Dwight D. Eisenhower $8 million

Gerald Ford $7 million

Jimmy Carter $7 million

Zachary Taylor $6 million

William Henry Harrison $5 million

Benjamin Harrison $5 million

Millard Fillmore $4 million

Rutherford Hayes $3 million

William Howard Taft $3 million

Franklin Pierce $2 million

The remaining 11 Presidents are worth between under $1 million up to less than $2 million, in the following order:

William McKinley

Warren G. Harding

James Buchanan onward are each worth less than $1 million downward, with Truman the poorest.

Abraham Lincoln

Andrew Johnson

Ulysses S. Grant

James A. Garfield

Chester Alan Arthur

Woodrow Wilson

Calvin Coolidge

Harry Truman

Many of the early Presidents were landowners and slave owners, and were, therefore, extremely wealthy.

The Presidents of the middle and late 19th century were mostly quite poor, including those who were military generals.

Presidents since 1929 have been generally much wealthier in most cases.

Many Presidents in modern times have become wealthy through speeches and writings.

Bill Clinton has the potential to become of the wealthiest Presidents in American history as time goes by, and more so, if his wife, Hillary Clinton, becomes President! The long term potential for Barack Obama is also for great wealth over his lifetime, leaving office at age 55!

College Education And The Presidency In 21st Century America: Is It Necessary? YES!

Ronald Leave a comment

Today, in 2015, approximately 31 percent of adults over 25 have at least a four year college degree as part of their credentials. This is an all time high.

In American history, all but eleven Presidents have had at least a four year college degree, much of the time when only a sliver of Americans had such a degree.

A college education does NOT guarantee success; does NOT guarantee excellence in one’s occupational pursuits; does NOT make any person automatically “better” than those without a college education!

What does a college education do that is beneficial?

It promotes the growth of critical thinking skills; it promotes empathy and compassion for those less fortunate; it promotes ability to analyze and evaluate materials; it promotes intellectual inquiry and curiosity, which is a good thing; it promotes ability to interpret events and happenings with a background of knowledge; it promotes tolerance and open mindedness!

Should not one, therefore, expect that a President of the United States have, at the least, a four year degree that has promoted these values?

Yes, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln did not have a college education, but that was 225 and 150 years ago, in a much less complex world than we have now!

Yes, Grover Cleveland, William McKinley, and Harry Truman did not have a college education, but they all were highly motivated to learn, to read books, to have intellectual curiosity.

Would not Andrew Jackson, William Henry Harrison, and Zachary Taylor, all military figures, have gained a more tolerant attitude if they had had more education, and maybe not killed as many Native Americans?

Would not Andrew Johnson have learned to work better with people and been more tolerant toward African Americans if he had had some more education?

Would not Martin Van Buren and Millard Fillmore have gained, also, by some more education? Ironically, despite lack of education, Fillmore founded the State University of NY Buffalo institution, which at least demonstrated his understanding of the value of higher education!

So with this background on Presidents and education, should it matter that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker dropped out of college at Marquette University in Milwaukee, in his senior year, and never finished his college degree, all for a job opportunity?

The answer is YES, as just because one takes on a job, does not mean one cannot finish a college degree, as many millions of others have done!

It is an issue of steadfastness, of dedication, of the old adage: “Finish what you start!” The extra effort required to finish is always worth it, as finishing a degree is a major accomplishment! If a politician wishes to be President, therefore, it should be expected that he shows persistence and commitment to follow through on any commitment he makes in life! He is not just one of us, where two thirds have not gone to or finished college. He is supposed to be the “best among us”, a figure we can look up to, and our children can see as a model!

Under those parameters, Scott Walker should not become President, without even mentioning his innumerable shortcomings, otherwise! He has failed a basic test of Presidential leadership!

Presidents And Age: An Issue For 2016!

Ronald Leave a comment

Historically, Americans have tended to vote for a President who is younger than his predecessor, sometimes dramatically so, as with John F. Kennedy after Dwight D. Eisenhower (27 years difference); as with Bill Clinton after George H. W. Bush (22 years difference); as with Barack Obama after George W. Bush (15 years difference); and as with Jimmy Carter after Gerald Ford (11 years difference).

In fact, only the following Presidents were older than their predecessors: William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, James Buchanan, Chester Alan Arthur, Benjamin Harrison, William Howard Taft, Woodrow Wilson, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Ronald Reagan. And only W. H. Harrison, Taylor, Buchanan, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Reagan were five years or more older than their predecessors.

But now, in 2016, we are likely, almost certainly, to elect a President who will be substantially older than Barack Obama. This includes Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders,Jim Webb, Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Carly Fiorina, Dr. Benjamin Carson, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Lindsey Graham, Mike Pence, Rick Snyder, Jon Huntsman and Mike Huckabee, a total of 16 potential candidates.

The odds of a younger President than Barack Obama are quite low, including Chris Christie, Rand Paul, Andrew Cuomo, Martin O’Malley, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, and Ted Cruz, a total of 8 potential candidates.

This oddity makes one wonder if the younger generation (under 45) will be as motivated to vote, as they are, naturally, attracted to comparative youth, as John F. Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama represented, when they were elected, and with the extra appeal of being, respectively, the first Catholic (JFK); the first two Southern governors (Carter and Clinton); and the first African American (Obama).

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!

Are We Entering An Age Of Older Presidents?

Ronald Leave a comment

In American history, we have had only five Presidents who were 64 or older in office when inaugurated—Ronald Reagan, William Henry Harrison, James Buchanan, George H. W. Bush, and Zachary Taylor.

An additional five Presidents were ages 60-63 when inaugurated: Harry Truman, Gerald Ford, John Adams, Andrew Jackson, and Dwight D. Eisenhower, but Truman and Ford were not elected at that age, but instead succeeded to the Oval Office.

This means 33 of our 43 Presidents were younger than 60 when being inaugurated President, with 24 in their 50s, and 9 in their 40s, and with Grover Cleveland in his 40s for his first term, and 50s for his second nonconsecutive term. The nine Presidents in their forties were, at the time of inauguration: James K. Polk and James A. Garfield (49); Franklin Pierce (48); Grover Cleveland and Barack Obama (47); Ulysses S. Grant and Bill Clinton (46); John F. Kennedy (43); and Theodore Roosevelt (42).

But it is now likely that the next President will be in his or her 60s, or even 70s, at the time of taking the Presidential oath. There are a total of eight potential Republican nominees in their 60s–ranging from, at the time of inauguration as follows: Mitt Romney (69); Rick Perry (66); Dr. Benjamin Carson (65); John Kasich (64); Jeb Bush (63); Mike Huckabee, Rob Portman, and Lindsey Graham (61). Romney and Perry would reach the age of 70 during a first term, and Romney, Perry, Carson, Kasich and Bush would all be in their 70s in a second term.

Meanwhile, the Democrats have four potential Presidential nominees who will be in their seventies when they would take the oath of office—Jerry Brown (78); Bernie Sanders (75); Joe Biden (74); and Jim Webb (70). All four, plus Hillary Clinton (69) and Elizabeth Warren (67) would reach the 70s during a first term, and Mark Warner (62) would reach 70 as well in a second term.

So a total of eight Republicans and seven Democrats would be over 70, either at the time of the inauguration, or within the next four years after, or the next eight years after!

When one realizes that only Dwight D. Eisenhower (70) and Ronald Reagan (77) were actually in the Presidency past their 70th birthday, and Ike was only three months beyond 70, it is clear that we are likely to create new ground, since much of the talent pool is comparatively old, and from the “Baby Boomer” generation born from 1946 onward.

Of course, there are younger Presidential candidates or potential candidates–for the Republicans–Rick Santorum (58); Mike Pence (57); Rand Paul and Chris Christie (54); and in the 40s in 2016, the following: Scott Walker (49); Ted Cruz and Paul Ryan (46); Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal (45), a total of nine other potential Presidents.

The Democrats have fewer alternatives: in the 50s in 2016 are: Andrew Cuomo (59); Amy Klobuchar (56); Martin O’Malley (54); and Kirsten Gillibrand (50). No one in their forties is seen as a potential Democratic nominee.

So we might end up with the oldest combination of Presidential candidates in American history, with Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney being front runners for now, and both reaching 70 within months of taking the oath of office!

Is Mitt Romney To Be A Repeat Of Richard Nixon And Ronald Reagan, Having Another Chance To Be President?

Ronald Leave a comment

Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP Presidential nominee, is giving strong hints that he might seek the Presidency again, after failing to win the nomination in 2008, and then losing to Barack Obama in 2012.

Public opinion polls show him leading, mostly based on recognition factor, that having been the nominee two years ago, most Americans know who he is.

But Romney lost, and to believe that a loser for the Presidency has another life defies reality.

Henry Clay and William Jennings Bryan ran three times each for the Presidency, and never won.

Thomas E. Dewey and Adlai Stevenson ran two times each for the Presidency, and never won.

The only first time losers who won the Presidency were Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson and William Henry Harrison, along with Richard Nixon

The only other President in modern times who lost a battle for a nomination and went on to reside in the White House was Ronald Reagan. It is also true that George H. W. Bush tried for the nomination against Reagan in 1980, but the battle was lost early, while Reagan fought to the convention in 1976 against Gerald Ford before he lost a very close race for the nomination.

So forgetting the early Presidents, the only realistic comparison is Romney to Nixon and Reagan.

But Romney is NOT Nixon or Reagan in any comparison.

Nixon had 14 years of federal government experience when he ran the first time for President in 1960, and Reagan had eight years as Governor of California, about one seventh of the nation, while Romney had one lone term as Governor of Massachusetts, and never had real interest in governing, as Nixon and Reagan did.

Nixon was very knowledgeable in how government worked, and Reagan had very strong conservative credentials and principles, and Romney has neither, as he only served as Governor to add on to his business experience.

No matter what one thinks or thought about Nixon and Reagan, we knew we would get what we saw, a man who had real commitment to definite ideas, while Romney is infamous for having no principles or beliefs that he will not change tomorrow if it might advance him.

Face the facts, that no one could possibly accuse Nixon or Reagan of being shallow, of “flip flopping”, of being someone who is a mystery, and of just wanting to be President for the sake of being President.

But that is the basic definition of Mitt Romney!