Posted on 06/13/2015 8:56:03 PM PDT by cradle of freedom
How were American elections conducted in the early days of the republic before the two party system? I have read that George Washington and other Founding Fathers were against political parties. Could we possibly find out way out of the party system that we have today and into a system that is really responsive to the citizenry?
There has almost always been two major parties. The Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans (anti-federalist), then the Democrats (from Jackson) and the Whigs, then the Democrats and the Republicans.
When Abraham Lincoln was elected, there was a four way tie (essentially) btwn Democrats and three other parties.
Weren’t there caucuses in the early days of the republic. I am not sure about this.
Thanks I will look it up.
It seems to me that I looked into that a few years ago, and it seemed that two major parties was pretty natural, and became the situation pretty quickly.
The Whigs were pre civil war America, the party only lasted 22 years itself (1833 to 1856). The Republicans held their first convention on July 6, 1854 and four months later held 19% of the Congress and 25% of the Senate, six years later they held the majority in the Congress, the majority in the Senate, and they had the Presidency. The Republicans were never really a third party at all.
Before that, from the founding on, here is an article, covering the earliest years, “Two Parties Emerge”.
http://www.ushistory.org/us/19c.asp
what’s what i thought. third party is usually a spoiler, like Nader and Perot.
would be nice to have a strong conservative party.
ems are already the liberal party.
Kennedy’s dem party is long gone. Didn’t love him, but he was against abortion, slashed taxes and had a vision of exploring space.
Factions developed almost immediately in the Cabinet and Congress behind Hamilton and Jefferson, but they did not become organized political parties until George Washington’s body had been cold for at least a few days. Washington opposed the creation of British-style political parties with every fiber of his being, so the actors waited until he was gone before making their moves.
And only land owners could vote.
No free sh*t army to pander to...
Begging the question (petitio principii) – providing what is essentially the conclusion of the argument as a premise.
Circular reasoning (circulus in demonstrando) – when the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with; sometimes called assuming the conclusion.
There has pretty much always bean a two-party system, just not always the same two parties - however, when a new one came about, one from before was pretty much completely gone or collapsing and no longer had any dominance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlHICfl_6s
as a practical matter, there have always been two parties. at the founding, the two central philosophical pillars were whether we organize more favorably toward britain or france. then it was central banking. then it was agrarian vs. industrial. now it’s statism vs. individual liberty.
but there have always been political poles. we just didn’t call them parties until (probably) the election of 1800 or 1804.
Originally, the state legislatures selected presidential electors, who were the best and brightest non-officeholders of a state. They would meet at the state capital, examine their consciences and vote for two men, one of which was not from their state. These electoral votes would be transmitted in closed envelopes to Congress, counted, and the winner would get the presidency, while the second place winner would get the vice presidency. A failure to get enough electoral votes would send the election into the House for decision.
In this era, no man would actually run for president because that would have been considered egotistical and -- even worse -- ungentlemanly.
You mean Washington’s death in 1799, who was our first president from 1789 to 1797?
Political parties seem unavoidable.
“The two parties adopted names that reflected their most cherished values. The Federalists of 1796 attached themselves to the successful campaign in favor of the Constitution and were solid supporters of the federal administration. Although Washington denounced parties as a horrid threat to the republic, his vice president John Adams became the de facto presidential candidate of the Federalists. The party had its strongest support among those who favored Hamilton’s policies. Merchants, creditors and urban artisans who built the growing commercial economy of the northeast provided its most dedicated supporters and strongest regional support.
Mural
This mural, located at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C., represents Thomas Jefferson’s views on the necessity of education.
The opposition party adopted the name DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICANS, which suggested that they were more fully committed to extending the Revolution to ordinary people. The supporters of the Democratic-Republicans (often referred to as the Republicans) were drawn from many segments of American society and included farmers throughout the country with high popularity among German and Scots-Irish ethnic groups. Although it effectively reached ordinary citizens, its key leaders were wealthy southern tobacco elites like Jefferson and Madison.”
“I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.”
— George Washington, Farewell Address
Everybody voted for George Washington.
Actually there were a number of states in the very early days (and a few holdouts for quite a number of years) where the legislature appointed the electors directly vs. delegating this to popular vote.
In our first four presidential elections, the legislatures appointed presidential electors. Staring in 1804, legislatures began delegating that duty to the voters of the state. By 1844, only South Carolina still had the legislature make the call, and by 1868 that too ended.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.