The president campaigns with the slogan, “Don’t change horses in the middle of the stream.” The Democrats call him a “liar, despot, braggart ” and much more.
It is an election, writes one observer, “in which voters cast ballots to determine crucial questions about the direction of the war, the government, and the society. Should the war be sustained or a settlement sought?” An “unpopular president,” he continues, is opposed most vociferously by “the peace wing of the Democratic Party.”
And not just the “peace wing,” for the platform of the Democratic party charges that “under the pretense of a military necessity of war-power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded” by such things as “the arbitrary military arrest, imprisonment, trial, and sentence of American citizens.” The Democratic nominee, however, a decorated veteran, rejects the peace wing of his party and attempts to move toward the center, “vowing instead to prosecute the war with more skill and vigor than” the president.
This may sound familiar, but this election was in 1864; the Democratic nominee was George McClellan; and the president was Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln won 212 electoral votes; McClellan won 21 (Kentucky, New Jersey, and Delaware); and 80 votes from states who were temporarily absent and otherwise engaged were not cast.
Observations from Discriminations
John at Discriminations points out that we are repeating history in Washington with the Bush-Kerry election, turning our notice to the Lincoln-McClellan election of 1864. He also points out, as ever, that the Washington Post only has one bias: Against.
Been there, doing that
John Rosenberg rips this tale from the very headlines: [T]he platform of the Democratic party charges that “under the pretense of a military necessity of war-power higher than the Constitution,…