5 ms·
George Washington lost his first campaign to the Virginia House of Burgess in 1755, 271-40. When he ran again 3 years later he gave away 28 gallons of rum, 50
by ordinaryperson 7y ago
George Washington lost his first campaign to the Virginia House of Burgess in 1755, 271-40.
When he ran again 3 years later he gave away 28 gallons of rum, 50 gallons of rum punch, 34 gallons of wine, 46 gallons of beer, and two gallons of cider royal — "nearly enough for a half-gallon per voter." And guess what, he won.
Considering we wouldn't even declare independence until 18 years later, it's safe to say that buying influence in an election has been American since the beginning, and even before.
[1] https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/12384/swilling-planters-bumbo-how-george-washington-won-votes-campaign-ads https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/12384/swilling-planters-...
- uoaei 7y agoThis comment carries the implication that because this practice is American, it's OK if we continue doing it. I heartily disagree and thinks it's abominable to consider something as consequential as this election in such stark, cynical terms.
- scarmig 7y agoFor some reason, say the words Founding Fathers and too many Americans' brains seize up, even though they were a motley assembly of, among other things, tax cheats, drunks, and racists. Nor were they particularly great political scientists: all of their main goals (no political parties! Congress acting on a check on the President!) fell by the wayside, and the rickety mess that is the Constitution has only survived because of a lack of threatening national competitors within a couple thousand miles of our borders.
- influx 7y agoAnd yet it is the oldest existing nation with a constitutional government in which the people elect their own government and representatives. It's always been a work in progress and always will be.
- harry8 7y agoIs it? Really? Hasn't the U.K. been a constitutional monarchy since 1688 or so? I totally accept it if we're only counting from the start of true universal adult suffrage, including women and taking no account of melanin content of skin - whoever is first on that deserves it be known widely for their national pride. Was that the USA?
- wyre 7y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_suffrage https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_suffrage UK has had universal suffrage since 1928. It looks like Finland was the first in 1904.
- scarmig 7y agoThe US can't realistically be considered an elected government until, optimistically, the 1960s. If you want to grant the US a couple centuries worth of mulligans, you can do the same with, at the very least, the UK, and arguably some other countries like Switzerland. And you ignore the other key point, which is that the US had no real national competitors near its borders, while other countries whose stability you discount did. That's the key point to American stability, not any world historical genius in drafting the Constitution.
- anthm1988 7y agoExcept we allowed progress to stall and now claim that's a virtue. America is by far the oldest nation with a presidency, and it's finally starting to collapse.
- philwelch 7y agoCongress doesn’t act as a check on the President?
- scarmig 7y agoSee: impeachment proceedings. Concretely, the Trump administration ignored Congressional subpoenas, among other things, in clear acts of obstruction of justice in a way that undermined Congressional authority. Also see, for instance, his treatment of tax returns. Partisan polarization has made the idea of interbranch checks and balances defunct.
- philwelch 7y agoThe courts never made a ruling on whether those Congressional subpoenas were legally binding—in fact, when one of the people subpoenaed tried to take that question to federal court, the House instead chose to withdraw the subpoena. I’m also not sure what Trump’s tax returns have to do with checks and balances between the Congress and the President. Setting those things aside, claiming that Congress doesn’t act as a check on the President simply does not square up with such things as the government shutdowns of 2013, 2018, and 2018/19, the Senate’s refusal to confirm Obama’s appointment of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, the 2011 debt ceiling crisis, and it only goes on from there. Partisan polarization has made the checks and balances between the two elected branches more, not less relevant.
- anthm1988 7y agoIf those subpoenas aren't valid, then congress cannot possible act as a check on the president. > Senate’s refusal to confirm Obama’s appointment of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court Not a check so much as a complete refusal to perform constitutional duty. What McConnell did was subvert the process of checks and balances to remove the presidents ability to make appointments.
- philwelch 7y ago> If those subpoenas aren't valid, then congress cannot possible act as a check on the president Sure they can. They can refuse to confirm his appointments, they can pass laws with a large enough supermajority to override his veto, and they can even remove him from office with a Senate supermajority. > What McConnell did was subvert the process of checks and balances to remove the presidents ability to make appointments. Thus disproving this notion that Congress is powerless against the President. The President has the constitutional power to make appointments with the advice and consent of the Senate. There's nothing in the Constitution that says the Senate has to have a good reason to withhold that consent.
- baybal2 7y agoOn the other hand, the Rockefeller family had a very long record of spending enormous sums on elections, whether by running themselves, or through an own candidate, and loosing every single time. It will be a good read for everybody deifying "a realpolitik grandmaster" Henry Kissinger how badly he failed in the role of Rockefeller's political adviser. His ineptitude in politics was borderline tragicomedic. This the best proof to me that a "professional politician" is really an oxymoron. The rich are bad at politics more often than not, and their money can compensate for that only partially. Georgie Washington was however a spectacular politician on his own, without a doubt.
- RickJWagner 7y agoSorry, there's been at least one successful Rockefeller. Win Rockefeller was elected, and very popular. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winthrop_Rockefeller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winthrop_Rockefeller
- JauntTrooper 7y agoNelson Rockefeller was also Governor of New York from 1959-1973.
- selimthegrim 7y agoSurely Jay Rockefeller of WV too?
- deevolution 7y agoAndrew yang offered Americans 1k/month... maybe he should have offered 1k/month in booze, opioids and football tickets instead
- MuffinFlavored 7y agoI have no answers as to why Andrew Yang did not poll more than 1-5% in Iowa/New Hampshire.
- akvadrako 7y agoVery little media attention.
- krtong 7y agoAlso basically offered us a $1000 giftcard to walmart to fix the income inequality created by oligopolies.
- beamatronic 7y agoHe was the only candidate I could relate to.
- 0-_-0 7y agoSame here, he is a huge nerd.
- webninja 7y agoTo me, Yang seemed like an advertising platform to raise awareness on a few of his clearly defined issues such as reasons for war, freedom dividends, and support for mothers raising children. These are a small number of ideas any candidate or senator can adopt and as president, you don’t just write 3 bills go home, and call it a term. Sanders and Buttigieg seemed more capable and well equipped (to me at least) to be able to tackle the wider range of B.S. presidents have to deal with.
- anthm1988 7y agoYeah, so was slavery. We're supposed to leave some things behind. America was founded as a white supremacist and extremely classist nation. We should be trying to fight those tendencies, not embrace them.