Party Holding White House Has Lost U.S. House Seats In 33 Of 36 Midterm Elections Since Civil War
In 33 of the 36 midterm elections held since the end of the Civil War, the party in the White House has lost seats in the United States House of Representatives.
We need to recall this as the 2010 midterm elections approach. There are underlying patterns in all things. This historical fact and pattern of midterm losses for the party holding the Presidency is one that has impacted both major parties over many years.
Beginning with 1866, only in 1934, 1998 and 2002 has the party holding the White House gained in the U.S. House.
In 1934, Democrats picked up nine seats to add onto an already large majority, as President Roosevelt remained popular and Republicans continued to be associated with the 1929 crash.
(Below–Joseph Byrns of Tennessee was the first Speaker for the House session that convened in 1935. He died during his term.)
In 1998, Democrats won five new seats as part of the backlash against the Republican vote for the impeachment of President Clinton. Despite the Democratic pick-ups, Republicans retained narrow control of the House.
In 2002, Republicans gained seven House seats in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks and due to the widespread public support of President George W. Bush at that point. This allowed Republicans to expand a slight House majority.
(Below–Dennis Hastert of Illinois was selected House Speaker in 1999 and held the office through 2007. Mr. Hastert was the longest serving Republican Speaker in Congressional history.)
What each of these elections has in common is that they took place in the shadow of larger history-making events. The Great Depression. A vote to impeach the President. The September 11 hijackings.
While in some cases the party occupying the White House has lost only a few House seats, the trend is unmistakable. Midterm elections offer voters a chance to vent against the party holding the Presidency.
In terms of a switch of party control in the House, this has occurred ten times in the 36 post-Civil War midterms. This is something I’ll be writing about in an upcoming post. I’ll also soon be discussing Senate results in midterms.
Liberals and all Democrats should recall that what is taking place today is is often how it is in our politics. It is difficult to see republicans doing well for the moment, but there is reason for hope in the days ahead.
Liberals and all Democrats should also recall that the election has not yet been held.
Consider donating or volunteering in the weeks ahead to the Democrat of your choice.
Here is some history of the House from the House Clerk. You can find, among many other things, the party breakdown for each session of Congress at this site.
A useful book is House–The History of the House of Representatives by Robert Remini.
What Google Searches Miss
I was looking up something on Google and typed the letter A. I saw that the word Amazon came up. Because my mind is weak, I then typed in each letter of the alphabet to see what word came up with each letter. Below is the list of what came up and in my view, of what should have come up.
Based on what comes up in these Google searches, it seems that many of us like to shop. It also seems that people like services that are free.
A—Amazon
What should come up is Arthur Ashe.
B—Best Buy
What should come up is Book. As in–Get off the computer and go read a book.
C—Craigslist
What should come up is Copley. As in, my favorite painting is John Singleton Copley’s Paul Revere. (Below)
D—Dictionary
I can’t improve on that. Good to see people looking up the right word to use.
E—ebay
What should come up is Elusive. As in, the true origin of many products sold on ebay can be Elusive.
F—Facebook
Well–I use Facebook enough so I guess I can’t begrudge folks. Feel free to look me up on Facebook—Neil Aquino—and send me a friend request. My current profile picture is myself wearing a suit and standing in front of a big ice sculpture. If I had to pick a word for F, it would be Friend in any case. It is good to have Friends.
G—Google
What should come up is Galveston, Texas. As in visit Galveston, Texas for a nice day at the beach or a nice weekend.
H–Hotmail
What should come up is History. As in, it is fun and useful to learn History. Or, Alan Taylor’s American Colonies is a great History book.
I—Imdb ( I had to look up what this was. It is a database of movies and movie stars.)
What should come up is Island. As in, I wish I lived on a distant Island. Or, I wish you lived on a distant Island.
J—JC Penney
What should come up is Joy Division. Love Will Tear Us Apart is my favorite song.
K—Kohls
What should come up is King. As in Martin Luther King. (Click here to see the best Martin Luther King Reading & Reference list on the web.)
L—Lowes
What should come up is Liberal. It’s okay that it did not come up though since liberals did so well in the most recent election.
M—-Myspace
What should come up is Martin Van Buren. A founder of the American system of political parties, Martin Van Buren (below) is worth more study and thought than folks realize. (Please consider starting your studies on Van Buren by clicking here.)
N—Netflix
What should come up is Night Out. As in, forget the Netflix and have a Night Out at a restaurant and movie.
O—Orkut (This is a social networking site run by Google. I had never heard of it. )
What should have come up is Optimistic. As in, I hope all people are able to remain Optimistic even in these hard times.
P—Photobucket
What should come up is Poetry. Here is a bit of Chinese Poetry from the 8th century.
Late autumn strips the distant hills
beyond the city gate.
A huge white cloud interrupts my dreams
and returns me to this world.
And you, old friend?
Flown silent as a crane.
Will you ever return
to your old home again?
Q—Quotes
Okay. I can go with that. A great quote is “A trifle consoles us because a trifle distresses us.” This was by Blaise Pascal.
R—Runescape (This is some kind of online game. When I clicked on it, it said that 117,123 people currently playing. I guess no matter how in-touch you think you are, there is big stuff you are missing.)
What should come up is Roses. As in Roses are my wife’s favorite flower and my wife is the best person in the world.
S—Sears
What should come up is Socialism. With the right in such a lather over the word, why not explore its meanings and see what it can offer in this time of free market failure.
T—Target
What should come up is Texas Liberal. Thanks for reading my blog!
U—utube
What should come up is Universal. As in, before long we must have government funded Universal health care in America.
V—Verizon Wireless
What should come up is Vanuatu. Vanuatu is a small Pacific Ocean island nation.
Below is a picture of the parliament building in Vanuatu….
…That was modeled upon the old Howard Johnson’s chain.
W—Walmart
What should come up is Wages. As in, raise Wages at Wal-Mart.
X—Xbox 360
What should come up is Xenial. Xenial means ” …the friendly relations between a guest and a host, or between a person and a foreign country.” Xenial is a very good word to know.
Y—Youtube
What should come up is You. As in, You are not the center of the world no matter how many products and services emphasize the word You.
Z—Zappos (This is a an online seller of purses and shoes.)
What should come up is Zebra. As in it is excellent to be able to run a picture of Zebras on this blog. (Please click here to learn about Zebras.)
Which States Have Produced The Most Presidents—Here Are The Facts
Which states have our Presidents called home? Which states have been the home states of the most Presidents?
(Above–John Tyler. He was the last President from Virginia.)
By home state. I mean the place where a President held office before becoming President. In one case—Dwight Eisenhower—there was really no home state. He did a lot of moving around. So I’ve made him “stateless.”
Zachary Taylor,a general like Eisenhower, is a close call on this matter. But he did live at a plantation he owned in Louisiana and his regional identity had a role in his election as President. So I’ll count Taylor as from Louisiana.
There are a few ways you could look at the question of what Presidents are from what states. You could list each state and count the number of Presidents from that state. This is what is done on the first list below.
You geta somewhat different picture if you limit the list only to Presidents who were elected, and exclude Vice Presidents who became President, but who never won election on their own. (These Presidents are Tyler, Fillmore, A. Johnson, Arthur, and Ford.) Doing it this way offers a sense of states and regions of the nation in the ascendancy at a given time. This is how the second list is complied.
(Below–Gerald Ford, in college here at the U. of Michigan, was not elected to the Presidency.)
Overall, 17 of the 50 states can claim a President.
List #1—-
New York (6) —Van Buren (8), Fillmore (13), Arthur (21), Cleveland (22 & 24), T. Roosevelt (26), F. Roosevelt (32)
Ohio (6) —W.H. Harrison (9), Hayes (19), Garfield (20), McKinley (25), Taft (27), Harding (29)
Virginia (5) — Washington (1) , Jefferson (3) , Madison (4) , Monroe (5), Tyler (10)
Massachusetts (4) — John Adams (2) , J.Q. Adams (6), Coolidge (30), Kennedy (35)
Tennessee (3) —Jackson (7), Polk (11), A. Johnson (17)
Illinois (3) —Lincoln (16), Grant (18), Obama (44)
California (3)—Hoover (31), Nixon (37), Reagan (40)
Texas (3) — L. Johnson (36), G.H.W. Bush (41), G.W. Bush (43)
Louisiana—Taylor (12)
New Hampshire— Pierce (14)
Pennsylvania—Buchanan (15)
Indiana—B. Harrison (23)
New Jersey—Wilson (28)
(Below–Woodrow Wilson throwing out the first pitch in 1916.)
Missouri—Truman (33)
Michigan–Ford (38)
Georgia—Carter (39)
Arkansas—Clinton (42)
Lsit # 2—-
1789, 1792—Virginia (Washington)
1796—Massachusetts (John Adams)
1800, 1804, 1808, 1812, 1816, 1820—Virginia ( Jefferson, Madison, Monroe)
1824—Massachusetts (J.Q.Adams)
1828, 1832—Tennessee (Jackson)
1836—New York (Van Buren)
1840–Ohio (W. Harrison)
1844—Tennessee (Polk)
1848—Louisiana (Taylor)
1852—New Hampshire (Pierce)
1856—Pennsylvania (Buchanan)
1860, 1864, 1868, 1872—Illinois (Lincoln, Grant)
1876, 1880—Ohio (Hayes, Garfield)
1884—New York (Cleveland)
(Below–Grover Cleveland in 1905. He left the White House, for a second time, in 1897.)
1888—Ohio (B.Harrison)
1892—New York (Cleveland)
1896, 1900—Ohio (McKinley)
1904—New York (T.Roosevelt)
1908—Ohio (Taft)
1912, 1916—New Jersey (Wilson)
1920—Ohio (Harding)
1924—Massachusetts (Coolidge)
1928—California (Hoover)
1932, 1936, 1940, 1944—New York (F.Roosevelt)
1948–Missouri (Truman)
1952, 1956—Eisenhower
1960—Massachusetts (Kennedy)
1964—Texas (Johnson)
1968, 1972—California (Nixon)
1976—Georgia (Georgia)
(Below–Jimmy Carter in 1937.)
1980, 1984—California (Reagan)
1988—Texas (G.H.W. Bush)
1992, 1996—Arkansas (Clinton)
2000, 2004—Texas (G.W.Bush)
2008—Illinois (Obama)
Our first six Presidents came from either Virginia or Massachusetts. Then there was a move west and towards the frontier with Jackson and Polk of Tennessee. Between 1860 and 1908 every elected President was from either Illinois, Ohio or New York. Hoover of California was in 1928 the first President from the West Coast. Beginning with Lyndon Johnson in 1964, every President gaining the White House by election was from either the Sunbelt or the South. Barack Obama of Illinois broke that trend in 2008.
Two strong online sources to learn about the Presidents are the Miller Center for Public Affairs at the University of Virginia and the C-SPAN President’s web home.
Two good books to learn about the Presidents are The American Presidency–The Authoritative Reference edited by Alan Brinkley and Davis Dyer and The Complete Book Of U.S. Presidents by William Degregorio. These books compliment each other well. The first provides short essays about each President’s term and the second is more biographical information.
(Below–A bunch of them in one place.)
Should Political Leaders Declare Themselves Gods To Keep Power?—The Facts From Antiquity
What if recently deposed Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick had announced himself a god? Would this have kept him from losing his post? Is declaring himself a god an option to save the career of politically troubled Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich? (above)
Let’s review the record from antiquity.
In his History of Government from the Earliest Times–Volume I, Ancient Monarchies and Empires, the late Oxford political scientist S.E. Finer addressed the subject of rulers as gods or as chosen by heaven.
In ancient Egypt, the Pharaoh asserted divinity. Professor Finer wrote that these claims held the most weight in the early years of the Egyptian kingdom. But in time, as Pharaohs lasted for only brief stretches before dying or being usurped, the claim to divininty must have been nearly impossible for anyone to really believe.
In this era of 24 hour cable news and irreverent coverage by political blogs, it would seem, at best, that only some of the public would believe a claim by a leader that he or she was a god. If rulers had a hard time maintaining the fiction back in ancient Egypt, imagine convincing people today.
Professor Finer also wrote that the Egyptians responded to the diminished stature of the Pharaoh’s person by giving the throne divinity more so than the individaul holding the throne.
From Finer—
“In my view…originally the (pharaohs) person was a sacred person, because, in accordance with certain rules or portents, he was, uniquely, indicated as the rightful possessor of the throne. But later it was the throne that made the king..irrespective of a particular individuals personal history or qualities.”
By this logic, the holder of the office of Speaker of the Texas House or the Governorship of Illinois would be a god by definition. It would not make any difference if Mr. Craddick or Mr. Blagojevich were gods because their successors would be gods as well. This, in my view, would limit the value of declaring yourself a god. No matter what, you’re going to get a god in the position.
In ancient China, the Emperor had the “Mandate of Heaven.”
From Finer—
“…the Chinese emperorship…was irreducibly ritualistic: ying-yang and the perfect harmony of Earth, Man ans Heaven turned exclusively upon the emperor’s actions….so the emperor, the Son of Heaven, was sacred because he alone could offer to Heaven the supreme sacrifices and maintain the harmony between the terrestrial order and the cosmos.”
Reading this you’d think a politician looking for a firm hold on power would try to establish himself as holding such importance. But the power of the Chinese emperor came with a catch not unlike what we have already seen in Egypt. The presumption was that if you challenged the emperor and prevailed, that you then had the Mandate of Heaven.
The verdict here, informed by history, is that declaring yourself to be god or as heaven-sent is not a viable strategy to keep political power. Though it sure would be fun if someone would try. It does seem possible that Governor Blagojevich has at least considered this idea.
(Below—Ancient Egypt)
Benjamin Harrison
Above is the 1889 Inauguration of Benjamin Harrison.
Here is the link to the Benjamin Harrison home in Indianapolis. I’m glad to be able to report that I’ve visited this home.
Here is a comprehensive profile of President Harrison. Mr. Harrison was a Republican who served from 1889-1893. From the profile—
“When Harrison lost his bid for reelection in 1892 to Grover Cleveland, he had himself partly to blame. He had frozen out many of those who should have been most active in his support, and his own party was lukewarm toward him. Additionally, midway through this second election, near the end of Harrison’s term, his wife, Caroline, died of tuberculosis. Her illness and eventual death greatly distracted him, which accounts in part for the magnitude of his defeat. In 1892, the voters handed Cleveland the most decisive presidential victory in twenty years. Harrison told his family he felt as though he had been freed from prison.”
President Harrison (below) always struck me as possibly having food in his beard.
Please Think Before You Vote—Galveston Voters Rejected Seawall in 1886
The great new book Galveston–A City On Stilts is about the building of the famous seawall (above) and other steps to make Galveston more safe from hurricanes.
This all took place in the years after the terrible Hurricane of 1900. The 1900 hurricane killed many thousands of people.
In Galveston it says this—“In 1886, a commission of city leaders considered building a seawall to protect Galveston Island. Citizens rejected this proposal because it seemed costly and unnecessary.”
When folks are voting this year on the absurd idea to do away with the income tax in Massachusetts, or voting for McCain because they just can’t accept a black President, think about the folks in Galveston in 1886. If they had been a bit more forward looking they would have likely escaped a great tragedy.
Please think before you vote.
(Below–Galveston in 1900)
Who I Would Have Supported For President—1788-1820
If I’d been around, who would I have supported for President between the years 1788 and 1820?
( Here is part two of this series–1824-1852)
Without knowing the past, we can’t grasp the present.
In the years 1788-1820, I would have been looking for a strong federal government, an expansion of our new found freedoms to include all people, and just treatment of Native Americans.
As it turned out, by 1820 there was little doubt that America was one nation united, it’s just that this unity often came at the expense of the freedoms and just treatment I would have hoped for.
Elections in these days were not decided by popular vote. Candidates were often nominated by caucuses of sitting members of Congress. This was the so-called King Caucus. Electoral votes were won by votes in state legislatures.
1788—In the first Presidential election, I’d have backed George Washington of Virginia (above as painted by Gilbert Stuart.) I would have felt the new nation needed a solid start, and that General Washington would be best to provide that foundation. Also, General Washington had no opponent in 1788.
1792—Washington was again the only candidate. Though by this point an opposition was emerging to the ruling Federalists.
1796—While I would have been concerned by the elitist tendencies of Federalist Alexander Hamilton, I would have supported Federalist Party Vice President John Adams of Massachusetts. In part this is because I’m a native New Englander. More meaningfully, Thomas Jefferson’s vision of an agrarian slave holding republic would not have held much appeal. Adams beat Jefferson of Virginia in 1800.
Jefferson’s candidacy can be seen as a beginning of the very successful Democratic-Republican Party.
1800—While I would have been turned off by Adams’ Alien & Sedition Acts, I would have supported President Adams over repeat challenger Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson’s view against standing armies in peacetime and his advocacy of slavery and states rights would have gone against my support of strong central government and a move towards the end of slavery. Jefferson won the election.
1804—The Federalist party was in disarray in 1804 and there was hardly a contest. I would have softened on Jefferson to a degree because of the Louisiana Purchase. This was an act of an assertive federal government no matter what Jefferson put forth as the official line. The Federalist was Charles Pinckney of South Carolina. Pinckney had a record of work and support for a strong federal government. By 1804 though, he had moved towards a more southern influenced view of these questions. I don’t think I would have backed either candidate.
( Below—The Louisiana Purchase and what America was in 1810.)
1808—This time it was Pinckney against Secretary of State James Madison of Virginia. At this point it would have all seemed useless. Many Virginia Federalists bolted and supported Madison. The narrowing of the Federalist party gave the party an increasingly aristocratic tint. I would have been frustrated in 1808.
Where were the champions of an America both more free and not looking towards the South? Madison won the election.
1812—Opposition to the Democratic-Republicans and the Virgina Dynasty got a moderate lift from debate over war with England. This is what would become known as the War of 1812. I would of have had a tough call in 1812. Democratic-Republican dissident DeWitt Clinton of New York was endorsed by Federalists to run against President Madison.
I would have liked Clinton for his role as “Father of the Erie Canal.” The canal helped unify the country. I would have been suspicious of the motives behind the War of 1812. I would have seen the war as about protecting the Southern cotton trade and as a vehicle to stop British assistance to Native Americans resisiting the advance of the United States across their lands.
On the other hand, I would have noted the nationalist sentiments behind the war and seen these feelings as, over the long haul, likely leading to the undermining of the states rights position.
( Below–The Erie Canal at Kirkville, New York. Looks like a nice place for a picnic.)
I think I would have gone with Clinton. Madison won the election.
General Andrew Jackson’s victory at the Battle of New Orleans at the end of the War of 1812 helped set off an agressive white man’s democratic nationalism that I would have seen as a logical extension of Jefferson’s views many years earlier.
1816—I would have sat 1816 out. Opposition to the Democratic-Republican Party took the form of 1814’s Hartford Convention. Secession was an option considered at this meeting by some of the leading remaining Federalists. I could have never had gone for that program. Secretary of State James Monroe of Virginia won the White House in 1816. In this so-called Era of Good Feelings election, Monroe won easily.
1820—Monroe was reelected without opposition. This would be the last election before the popular vote of eligible white males become the deciding factor.
David Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Electionsis the best online source of Presidential election history.
The Penguin History of the USA by Hugh Brogan is a great one volume history of the nation.
Next up will be my Presidential choices for the years between 1824 and 1852.
( Below–White House portrait of James Monroe. I don’t think he is gazing out at the future. Monroe was the last of the Virginia Dynasty.)
Biden-Palin Debate Summary—I Did Not Watch A Minute Of The Debate
Due to other obligations, I was not home for the debate last night between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin. I have it recorded, but I don’t think I’ll watch it. That would be 90 minutes of my life I’d be unable to get back.
I got home last night around midnight and saw some headlines online suggesting the debate had been pretty much a draw. Though some focus groups felt Senator Biden had done better. The two print newspapers I get each morning also said both candidates had done well enough and that no knock-out punch had been delivered.
That tells me pretty much what I need to know. A great thing about live TV is that you can’t be sure one of the candidates won’t walk over the other and unload a kick in the shin. Once you realize that nothing like that took place, it all seems a bit less interesting.
I’ve written before that I make a point to spend only so much time following the Presidential campaign. It is not an edifying process. You’d be better off reading a good book of American political history such as America’s Three Regimes–A New Political History by Morton Keller. Reading a book of political history provides more context about what is taking place now in politics than yet another tracking poll or debates over lipstick.
If the debate between Vice Presidential candidates has made you wonder about the history of the office and the people who have served as Vice President, the U.S. Senate has an excellent web home for the Vice Presidency. There is a history of the office and strong profiles of each of our Vice Presidents.
Above is Vice President Thomas Marshall of Indiana who served as Vice President under Woodrow Wilson between 1913 and 1921. Vice President Marshall was kept out of the loop after President Wilson had his stroke.