The Presidential Campaign of 1860

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Presidential Campaign of 1860 The Presidential Campaigns of the Civil War and Reconstruction Create an Ad Campaign Directions: You and your partner will draw a candidate and create an advertising campaign for him. You must create at least one positive ad and one negative ad featuring campaign posters or TV spots using Windows Movie Maker. Positive campaign ad: Come up with a theme and a slogan that accurately conveys the candidate’s (or the party’s) positions on the major issues of the day. Your support ad may include a swipe at your opponent(s), but it may not be primarily an attack against the opposition. Negative campaign ad: these are ads that primarily attack the opposition rather than support your candidate. You can choose to create one of each or two of the same type: Poster: Minimum size: 11”x17”, max size 24”x36”. Use original art, collage, images liberated from the Internet, etc., but the composition and ideas must be your own. Movie Maker ad: Minimum 2-minute spot; max 4-minutes. You can use still images, video clips, audio narration and music clips. The Candidates: 1860 1864 1868 1872 1876 Edward Bates (MO) Abraham Lincoln Ulysses Grant (IL) Ulysses Grant (IL) Rutherford B. Hayes Simon Cameron (PA) (OH) Salmon P. Chase (OH) James Blaine (ME) Republican Abraham Lincoln Roscoe Conkling (NY) (IL) John Hartranft (PA) William Seward (NY) Marshall Jewell (PA) Oliver Morton (IN) Horace Greeley (NY) Charles Adams (MA) Benjamin Brown (MO) Liberal Salmon Chase (OH) Republican Andrew Curtin (PA) David Davis (IL) John Palmer (IL) Lyman Trumbull (IL) Daniel Dickenson George McClellan Horatio Seymour Horace Greeley (NY) Samuel Tilden (NY) (NY) (NJ) (NY) Jeremiah Black (PA) William Allen (OH) Stephen A. Douglas Charles O’Conor (NY) George Pendleton Thomas Bayard (DE) Thomas Hendricks (IL) Horatio Seymour (OH) William Groesbeck (IN) James Guthrie (KY) (NY) Winfield Hancock (OH) Winfield Scott Robert Hunter (VA) Thomas Seymour (PA) Hancock (PA) Andrew Johnson (TN) (CT) Thomas Hendricks Joel Parker (NJ) Northern Horatio Seymour (IN) Thomas Bayard (DE) Democrat (NY) Andrew Johnson (TN) Allen Thurman (OH) Salmon P. Chase (OH) Sanford Church (NY) Asa Packer (PA) James English (CT) James Doolittle (WI) Joel Parker (NJ) John C. Southern Breckenridge (KY) Democrat Joseph Lane (OR) Constitutional John Bell (TN) Union Sam Houston (TX) Victoria Woodhull Equal Rights (OH) Greenback Peter Cooper (NY) Green Clay Smith Prohibition (KY).
Recommended publications
  • Martin Van Buren: the Greatest American President
    SUBSCRIBE NOW AND RECEIVE CRISIS AND LEVIATHAN* FREE! “The Independent Review does not accept “The Independent Review is pronouncements of government officials nor the excellent.” conventional wisdom at face value.” —GARY BECKER, Noble Laureate —JOHN R. MACARTHUR, Publisher, Harper’s in Economic Sciences Subscribe to The Independent Review and receive a free book of your choice* such as the 25th Anniversary Edition of Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government, by Founding Editor Robert Higgs. This quarterly journal, guided by co-editors Christopher J. Coyne, and Michael C. Munger, and Robert M. Whaples offers leading-edge insights on today’s most critical issues in economics, healthcare, education, law, history, political science, philosophy, and sociology. Thought-provoking and educational, The Independent Review is blazing the way toward informed debate! Student? Educator? Journalist? Business or civic leader? Engaged citizen? This journal is for YOU! *Order today for more FREE book options Perfect for students or anyone on the go! The Independent Review is available on mobile devices or tablets: iOS devices, Amazon Kindle Fire, or Android through Magzter. INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE, 100 SWAN WAY, OAKLAND, CA 94621 • 800-927-8733 • [email protected] PROMO CODE IRA1703 Martin Van Buren The Greatest American President —————— ✦ —————— JEFFREY ROGERS HUMMEL resident Martin Van Buren does not usually receive high marks from histori- ans. Born of humble Dutch ancestry in December 1782 in the small, upstate PNew York village of Kinderhook, Van Buren gained admittance to the bar in 1803 without benefit of higher education. Building on a successful country legal practice, he became one of the Empire State’s most influential and prominent politi- cians while the state was surging ahead as the country’s wealthiest and most populous.
    [Show full text]
  • GEN. LEWIS CASS, Mexico Cali- It Tious Opposition to the Democratic Policy, Under Tho He on to Washington and Immediately Proceeded to the City of Paris
    Mr. Speech IXcsponscs of the Whig CuiiIil:Meft. ic of the Louisville Journal IVailcd Territorial IJill Vot upon its Passage. The German 1'urlinineut. In Chamberlain's Washington 2 ilia na State Sentinel. Judge Chamberlain, one of the Democratic Sena- The mystery of Taylor's long delay in answering to tlic Counter. City, July 27. 118. FitANKioKT, June 23. After remaining in session nil night, and until a Mr. Soiron proclaimed the following "law on tho torial Electors, to ap- the Whig Na- Greensburg, Ind., July 27, 1819. spoke in this according the official letter of President of the o city, y, New-Mexic- L?mAL TI01LAKCC IS THE rICt OF LIBEBTY. late hour to-da- the Senate passed tho Oregon, creation .f a Provisional Central Power for Ger- pointment, "Slaughter-House,- To the the Coon Skinner : I see in a on Saturday last. His speech was able tional " is at last fully explained. Editor of and California Territorial bill, by a vote of many " 44 Ky., called the f l AAI'Ol.IS, AUGUST 2, 1S48. and effective, os his speeches always are. He re- It nppears that Taylor refused " to take the letter little sheet published at Louisville, S3 to 22. I send you the names of those who voted " I. Until a Government he definitely created for e, a infamous article an ariicle bearing bill. Terms. viewed the past and the present attitude of tho whig of Gov. Morehead out of the post-offic- because the Journal, mo?t against the Germany, a Provisional Central Tower fhall be formed Our impress falsehood upon its own face, headed Nays Messrs.
    [Show full text]
  • Niall Palmer
    EnterText 1.1 NIALL PALMER “Muckfests and Revelries”: President Warren G. Harding in Fact and Fiction This article will assess the development of the posthumous reputation of President Warren Gamaliel Harding (1921-23) through an examination of key historical and literary texts in Harding historiography. The article will argue that the president’s image has been influenced by an unusual confluence of factors which have both warped history’s assessment of his administration and retarded efforts at revisionism. As a direct consequence, the stereotypical, deeply negative, portrait of Harding remains rooted in the nation’s consciousness and the “rehabilitation” afforded to many presidents by revisionist writers continues to be denied to the man still widely-regarded as the worst president of the twentieth century. “Historians,” Eugene Trani and David Wilson observed in 1977, “have not been gentle with Warren G. Harding.”1 In successive surveys of American political scientists, historians and journalists, undertaken to rank presidents by achievement, vision and leadership skills, the twenty-ninth president consistently comes last.2 The Chicago Sun- Times, publishing the findings of fifty-eight presidential historians and political scientists in November 1995, placed Warren Harding at the head of the list of “The Ten Worst” Niall Palmer: Muckfests and Revelries 155 EnterText 1.1 Presidents.3 A 1996 New York Times poll branded Harding an outright “failure,” alongside two presidents who presided over the pre-Civil War crisis, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan. The academic merit and methodological underpinnings of such surveys are inevitably flawed. Nonetheless, in most cases, presidential status assessments are fluid, reflecting the fluctuations of contemporary opinion and occasional waves of academic revisionism.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Maryland's Electoral College Meetings 1789-2016
    A History of Maryland’s Electoral College Meetings 1789-2016 A History of Maryland’s Electoral College Meetings 1789-2016 Published by: Maryland State Board of Elections Linda H. Lamone, Administrator Project Coordinator: Jared DeMarinis, Director Division of Candidacy and Campaign Finance Published: October 2016 Table of Contents Preface 5 The Electoral College – Introduction 7 Meeting of February 4, 1789 19 Meeting of December 5, 1792 22 Meeting of December 7, 1796 24 Meeting of December 3, 1800 27 Meeting of December 5, 1804 30 Meeting of December 7, 1808 31 Meeting of December 2, 1812 33 Meeting of December 4, 1816 35 Meeting of December 6, 1820 36 Meeting of December 1, 1824 39 Meeting of December 3, 1828 41 Meeting of December 5, 1832 43 Meeting of December 7, 1836 46 Meeting of December 2, 1840 49 Meeting of December 4, 1844 52 Meeting of December 6, 1848 53 Meeting of December 1, 1852 55 Meeting of December 3, 1856 57 Meeting of December 5, 1860 60 Meeting of December 7, 1864 62 Meeting of December 2, 1868 65 Meeting of December 4, 1872 66 Meeting of December 6, 1876 68 Meeting of December 1, 1880 70 Meeting of December 3, 1884 71 Page | 2 Meeting of January 14, 1889 74 Meeting of January 9, 1893 75 Meeting of January 11, 1897 77 Meeting of January 14, 1901 79 Meeting of January 9, 1905 80 Meeting of January 11, 1909 83 Meeting of January 13, 1913 85 Meeting of January 8, 1917 87 Meeting of January 10, 1921 88 Meeting of January 12, 1925 90 Meeting of January 2, 1929 91 Meeting of January 4, 1933 93 Meeting of December 14, 1936
    [Show full text]
  • Ulysses S. Grant and Julia Dent Grant Papers Finding Aid
    Mississippi State University Scholars Junction USGPL Finding Aids Ulysses S. Grant Presidential Library 12-1-2020 Ulysses S. Grant and Julia Dent Grant papers Finding Aid Ulysses S. Grant Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/usgpl-findingaids Recommended Citation Ulysses S. Grant and Julia Dent Grant papers, Ulysses S. Grant Presidential Library, Mississippi State University This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the Ulysses S. Grant Presidential Library at Scholars Junction. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGPL Finding Aids by an authorized administrator of Scholars Junction. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ulysses S. Grant and Julia Dent Grant papers USGPL.USGJDG This finding aid was produced using ArchivesSpace on December 01, 2020. Mississippi State University Libraries P.O. Box 5408 Mississippi State 39762 [email protected] URL: http://library.msstate.edu/specialcollections Ulysses S. Grant and Julia Dent Grant papers USGPL.USGJDG Table of Contents Summary Information ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Biographical Note: Ulysses S. Grant ................................................................................................................. 3 Scope and Content Note ...................................................................................................................................... 6 Administrative
    [Show full text]
  • Abraham Lincoln Papers
    Abraham Lincoln papers From Sydney H. Gay to [John G. Nicolay], September 17, 1864 New York, Sept. 17 1864 1 My Dear Sir— I write you at the suggestion of Mr. Wilkerson to state a fact or two which possibly you may make use of in the proper quarter. 1 Samuel Wilkeson was Washington bureau chief of the New York Tribune. Formerly an ally of Thurlow Weed, Wilkeson at this time was in the camp of Horace Greeley. 2 The recent changes in the N. Y. Custom House have been made at the demand of Thurlow Weed. 3 4 This is on the authority of a statement made by Mr. Nicolay to Surveyor Andrews & Genl. Busteed. Now Andrews refuses to resign, & if he is removed he will publish the facts substantiated by oath & 5 correspondence. It will go to the country that Mr. Lincoln removed from office a man of whom he thought so well that he promised to give him anything he asked hereafter, provided he would enable the President now to accede to the demands of the man who, outside of this state, is universally beleived to be the most infamous political scoundrel that ever cursed any country, & in the state is without influence with the party which he has publicly denounced & abandoned. Mr. Lincoln ought to know immediately that such is the attitude which he will occupy before the people if he persists in this matter. Andrews will defend himself, & I know, from a consultation with some of the leading men in the party here, to-day, that he will be upheld & justified in it, be the consequences what they may.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Doc. 108-222
    THIRTIETH CONGRESS MARCH 4, 1847, TO MARCH 3, 1849 FIRST SESSION—December 6, 1847, to August 14, 1848 SECOND SESSION—December 4, 1848, to March 3, 1849 VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES—GEORGE M. DALLAS, of Pennsylvania PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE—DAVID R. ATCHISON, 1 of Missouri SECRETARY OF THE SENATE—ASBURY DICKINS, 2 of North Carolina SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE SENATE—ROBERT BEALE, of Virginia SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES—ROBERT C. WINTHROP, 3 of Massachusetts CLERK OF THE HOUSE—BENJAMIN B. FRENCH, of New Hampshire; THOMAS J. CAMPBELL, 4 of Tennessee SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE HOUSE—NEWTON LANE, of Kentucky; NATHAN SARGENT, 5 of Vermont DOORKEEPER OF THE HOUSE—ROBERT E. HORNER, of New Jersey ALABAMA CONNECTICUT GEORGIA SENATORS SENATORS SENATORS 14 Arthur P. Bagby, 6 Tuscaloosa Jabez W. Huntington, Norwich Walter T. Colquitt, 18 Columbus Roger S. Baldwin, 15 New Haven 19 William R. King, 7 Selma Herschel V. Johnson, Milledgeville John M. Niles, Hartford Dixon H. Lewis, 8 Lowndesboro John Macpherson Berrien, 20 Savannah REPRESENTATIVES Benjamin Fitzgerald, 9 Wetumpka REPRESENTATIVES James Dixon, Hartford Thomas Butler King, Frederica REPRESENTATIVES Samuel D. Hubbard, Middletown John Gayle, Mobile John A. Rockwell, Norwich Alfred Iverson, Columbus Henry W. Hilliard, Montgomery Truman Smith, Litchfield John W. Jones, Griffin Sampson W. Harris, Wetumpka Hugh A. Haralson, Lagrange Samuel W. Inge, Livingston DELAWARE John H. Lumpkin, Rome George S. Houston, Athens SENATORS Howell Cobb, Athens Williamson R. W. Cobb, Bellefonte John M. Clayton, 16 New Castle Alexander H. Stephens, Crawfordville Franklin W. Bowdon, Talladega John Wales, 17 Wilmington Robert Toombs, Washington Presley Spruance, Smyrna ILLINOIS ARKANSAS REPRESENTATIVE AT LARGE John W.
    [Show full text]
  • The Democratic Party and the Transformation of American Conservatism, 1847-1860
    PRESERVING THE WHITE MAN’S REPUBLIC: THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN CONSERVATISM, 1847-1860 Joshua A. Lynn A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2015 Approved by: Harry L. Watson William L. Barney Laura F. Edwards Joseph T. Glatthaar Michael Lienesch © 2015 Joshua A. Lynn ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Joshua A. Lynn: Preserving the White Man’s Republic: The Democratic Party and the Transformation of American Conservatism, 1847-1860 (Under the direction of Harry L. Watson) In the late 1840s and 1850s, the American Democratic party redefined itself as “conservative.” Yet Democrats’ preexisting dedication to majoritarian democracy, liberal individualism, and white supremacy had not changed. Democrats believed that “fanatical” reformers, who opposed slavery and advanced the rights of African Americans and women, imperiled the white man’s republic they had crafted in the early 1800s. There were no more abstract notions of freedom to boundlessly unfold; there was only the existing liberty of white men to conserve. Democrats therefore recast democracy, previously a progressive means to expand rights, as a way for local majorities to police racial and gender boundaries. In the process, they reinvigorated American conservatism by placing it on a foundation of majoritarian democracy. Empowering white men to democratically govern all other Americans, Democrats contended, would preserve their prerogatives. With the policy of “popular sovereignty,” for instance, Democrats left slavery’s expansion to territorial settlers’ democratic decision-making.
    [Show full text]
  • (July-November 1863) Lincoln's Popularit
    Chapter Thirty-one “The Signs Look Better”: Victory at the Polls and in the Field (July-November 1863) Lincoln’s popularity soared after the victories at Gettysburg, Vicksburg, and Port Hudson. His old friend from Illinois, Jesse W. Fell, reflected the changed public mood. In August, Fell told Lyman Trumbull that during the early stages of the war, “I did not like some things that were done, and many things that were not done, by the present Administration.” Along with most “earnest, loyal men, I too was a grumbler, because, as we thought, the Gov't. moved too slow.” But looking back, Fell acknowledged that “we are not now disposed to be sensorious [sic] to the ‘powers that be,’ even among ourselves.” To the contrary, “it is now pretty generally conceded, that, all things considered, Mr. Lincoln's Administration has done well.” Such “is the general sentiment out of Copperhead Circles.” Lincoln had been tried, and it was clear “that he is both honest and patriotic; that if he don't go forward as fast as some of us like, he never goes backwards.”1 To a friend in Europe, George D. Morgan explained that the president “is very popular and good men of all sides seem to regard him as the man for the place, for they see what one cannot see abroad, how difficult the position he has to fill, to keep 1 Fell to Lyman Trumbull, Cincinnati, 11 August 1863, Trumbull Papers, Library of Congress. 3378 Michael Burlingame – Abraham Lincoln: A Life – Vol. 2, Chapter 31 the border States quiet, to keep peace with the different generals, and give any satisfaction to the radicals.”2 One of those Radicals, Franklin B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Governors of Connecticut, 1905
    ThegovernorsofConnecticut Norton CalvinFrederick I'his e dition is limited to one thousand copies of which this is No tbe A uthor Affectionately Dedicates Cbis Book Co George merriman of Bristol, Connecticut "tbe Cruest, noblest ana Best friend T €oer fia<T Copyrighted, 1 905, by Frederick Calvin Norton Printed by Dorman Lithographing Company at New Haven Governors Connecticut Biographies o f the Chief Executives of the Commonwealth that gave to the World the First Written Constitution known to History By F REDERICK CALVIN NORTON Illustrated w ith reproductions from oil paintings at the State Capitol and facsimile sig natures from official documents MDCCCCV Patron's E dition published by THE CONNECTICUT MAGAZINE Company at Hartford, Connecticut. ByV I a y of Introduction WHILE I w as living in the home of that sturdy Puritan governor, William Leete, — my native town of Guil ford, — the idea suggested itself to me that inasmuch as a collection of the biographies of the chief executives of Connecticut had never been made, the work would afford an interesting and agreeable undertaking. This was in the year 1895. 1 began the task, but before it had far progressed it offered what seemed to me insurmountable obstacles, so that for a time the collection of data concerning the early rulers of the state was entirely abandoned. A few years later the work was again resumed and carried to completion. The manuscript was requested by a magazine editor for publication and appeared serially in " The Connecticut Magazine." To R ev. Samuel Hart, D.D., president of the Connecticut Historical Society, I express my gratitude for his assistance in deciding some matters which were subject to controversy.
    [Show full text]
  • ELECTORAL VOTES for PRESIDENT and VICE PRESIDENT Ø902¿ 69 77 50 69 34 132 132 Total Total 21 10 21 10 21 Va
    ¿901¿ ELECTORAL VOTES FOR PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT ELECTORAL VOTES FOR PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT 901 ELECTION FOR THE FIRST TERM, 1789±1793 GEORGE WASHINGTON, President; JOHN ADAMS, Vice President Name of candidate Conn. Del. Ga. Md. Mass. N.H. N.J. Pa. S.C. Va. Total George Washington, Esq ................................................................................................... 7 3 5 6 10 5 6 10 7 10 69 John Adams, Esq ............................................................................................................... 5 ............ ............ ............ 10 5 1 8 ............ 5 34 Samuel Huntington, Esq ................................................................................................... 2 ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 2 1027 John Jay, Esq ..................................................................................................................... ............ 3 ............ ............ ............ ............ 5 ............ ............ 1 9 John Hancock, Esq ............................................................................................................ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 2 1 1 4 Robert H. Harrison, Esq ................................................................................................... ............ ............ ............ 6 ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ...........
    [Show full text]
  • The Democratic Split During Buchanan's Administration
    THE DEMOCRATIC SPLIT DURING BUCHANAN'S ADMINISTRATION By REINHARD H. LUTHIN Columbia University E VER since his election to the presidency of the United States Don the Republican ticket in 1860 there has been speculation as to whether Abraham Lincoln could have won if the Democratic party had not been split in that year.' It is of historical relevance to summarize the factors that led to this division. Much of the Democratic dissension centered in the controversy between President James Buchanan, a Pennsylvanian, and United States Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. The feud was of long standing. During the 1850's those closest to Buchanan, par- ticularly Senator John Slidell of Louisiana, were personally antagonistic toward Douglas. At the Democratic national conven- tion of 1856 Buchanan had defeated Douglas for the presidential nomination. The Illinois senator supported Buchanan against the Republicans. With Buchanan's elevation to the presidency differences between the two arose over the formation of the cabinet.2 Douglas went to Washington expecting to secure from the President-elect cabinet appointments for his western friends William A. Richardson of Illinois and Samuel Treat of Missouri. But this hope was blocked by Senator Slidell and Senator Jesse D. Bright of Indiana, staunch supporters of Buchanan. Crestfallen, 'Edward Channing, A History of the United States (New York, 1925), vol. vi, p. 250; John D. Hicks, The Federal Union (Boston and New York, 1937), p. 604. 2 Much scholarly work has been done on Buchanan, Douglas, and the Democratic rupture. See Philip G. Auchampaugh, "The Buchanan-Douglas Feud," and Richard R.
    [Show full text]