Back-to-back two-term prez are rare

Danny Taggart's Blogarama ^ | 12/02/2004 | Danny Taggart

[billybudd]

On November 2, G.W. Bush assured himself eight years in office, on the heels of his predecessor's eight-year presidency. How common are back-to-back two-term presidencies? Not very. Besides the present day, it has happened in only two other time periods in American history. Each time, there were in fact three consecutive multi-term presidencies (FDR had 12 years). The first period was 1801-1825; the second was 1933-1961.

Number	Name	From	To	Party	Years
3	Thomas Jefferson	1801	1809	Democratic-Republican	8
4	James Madison	1809	1817	Democratic-Republican	8
5	James Monroe	1817	1825	Democratic-Republican	8
32	Franklin Delano Roosevelt	1933	1945	Democrat	12
33	Harry S. Truman	1945	1953	Democrat	8
34	Dwight David Eisenhower	1953	1961	Republican	8

It would be interesting to figure out what is common between these three time periods in our history. What factors fueled the need for political continuity (or conversely, what kinds of events were brought about by extended political continuity)? War is an obvious one - the war of 1812, WWII, and the current war on terror. There may be more fundamental things going on as well.

[SoFloFreeper]

Truman was really only a 1 termer, since his 1st term was actually FDR's.

Just what I thought when I read this, William...but this is very interesting. I concur that the war may be a factor.

[krb]

True, then by the author's own criteria they should add Kennedy/Johnson after Eisenhower.

[krb]

Maybe during war the opposition party runs its weaker members? That's what the Dems did in 1992 (remember all the decent Dems who could have run instead of Slick? Nunn, Cuomo, etc.)...

[johnnycap]

Then again, you could probably look at George Bush, Sr. as Reagan's third term. I know that was the general sentiment when he was elected. That being the case, we have now had continuity since 1980.

[w1andsodidwe]

Including Truman in this as a two termer makes this just silly.

[billybudd]

Good point, although Truman did get elected after having served as President, implying some desire for continuity from the electorate. I guess it depends how loose the reelection standard is. With the strictest standard of two-term president, we'd be left with the 1801-1825 period.

[usapatriot28]

True, then by the author's own criteria they should add Kennedy/Johnson after Eisenhower.

In which case you'd have to Nixon/Ford as well, since they followed Johnson.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Really doesn't point to anything at all. I have a 4 leaf clover.

[w1andsodidwe]

With the strictest standard of two-term president, we'd be left with the 1801-1825 period.

You are right. That actually does more to prove his point, so why lie about Truman and imply he was elected twice?

[GreenLanternCorps]

If you are going to count a dead Presidents successor or one who resigned, then it should be:

Number Name From To Party Years
3 Thomas Jefferson 1801 1809 Democratic-Republican 8
4 James Madison 1809 1817 Democratic-Republican 8
5 James Monroe 1817 1825 Democratic-Republican 8
16/17 Lincoln/A. Johnson 1861 1869 Republican/Democrat
18 U. S. Grant 1869 1877 Republican
32 Franklin D. Roosevelt 1933 1945 Democrat 12
33/34 FDR/H. Truman 1945 1953 Democrat 8
34 Dwight Eisenhower 1953 1961 Republican 8
35/36 JFK LBJ 1961 1969 Democrat 8
37/38 R. Nixon/G. Ford 1969 1977 Republican 8

[Verginius Rufus]

The last time a twice-elected President was followed by a twice-elected President was when Cleveland was followed by McKinley. Of course Cleveland's two terms were not consecutive, and McKinley was assassinated half a year into his second term, but both men did win twice.