English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

These elections should be ones in which the candidates represented a choice between two distinct social visions.

2007-05-09 05:00:09 · 4 answers · asked by ksu04 1 in Arts & Humanities History

4 answers

Both of George W. Bush elections (enough said) and Ronald Reagon (Reagon-nomics).

2007-05-09 05:08:56 · answer #1 · answered by Honey 3 · 0 1

1860 would probably be one of the most interesting. At that time there was Northern Republican and Southern Republican, same for Democrats(which is how Southern Democrat actually started.) I'm not sure that 1864 would have a whole lot of influence. Remember the Lee surrendered at the start of April in 1865. So if the elections were in November(not sure when they were held) then you have to realize that the C.S.A. was winding down and close to an end. Really the bigger issue there would be about the rebuilding, and of course that wouldh't have really been an issue mentioned as far as we know but think about it. Remember that Northerners went South and vice-versa as far as fighting so really the war would have likely gone on either way.
I'd say the first election would have been important and should be in that top 3 as well(NOTE: Washington wasn't ELECTED in the way we think of it now, there was no one else running)
I'll agree about Jefferson as well.

2007-05-09 05:30:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Certainly the elections of 1860 and 1864 would have to be included. 1860 led to the Civil War and eventually to abolition of slavery, and if the 1864 election had ended differently, the Confederacy would have survived and the US as we know it today probably wouldn't exist.

You could make several different choices for a third in that group, but I would go with the election of 1800. It had political effects, since it influenced the emergence of the two party system and led to a constitutional amendment that effected the way Presidents were elected. Since Jefferson made the Louisianna Purchase, it also expanded immensely the size of the country.

2007-05-09 05:16:50 · answer #3 · answered by A M Frantz 7 · 1 1

Abraham Lincoln, of course. The South declared before the election that they would secede if he was elected, so Northerners who voted for him knew what they were getting into and wanted to take the more drastic steps represented by Lincoln, instead the moderate steps advocated by his opponenets.

Jefferson is good also. His election as a Republican defeated the very prominent Federalist party, that wanted to create essentially an aristocracy of intellect. His win, and the increased prominence of the Republican Party, is largely responsible for the current political perspectives about how much involvement everyday people should have in politics.

You should definitely also include Andrew Jackson. He was elected in 1828. He was the first "Western" president. He opposed the National Bank, dealt with the nullification crisis, and was responsible for the Indian Removal policies. His campaign was bitterly opposed by "Eastern" career politicians, and is one of the first examples of mudslinging in a presidential campiagn in American history.

2007-05-09 07:09:47 · answer #4 · answered by librarian_girl03 3 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers