Why is the election of 1896 considered a watershed in American politics?Note:
A watershed in U.S. economic/social history, the Election of 1896 witnessed the last great surge of agrarian populist protest clashing against the growing power of an urbanizing, industrial America. [ Despite a spirited campaign, comprising more than 600 speeches and 18,000 miles across 27 states, William Jennings Bryan (D), the "silver- tongued orator" and "boy wonder of the Prairie," was narrowly defeated by William McKinley (R) by under 600,000 votes. The electoral results - McKinley's 271 to Bryan's 176 - did not tell the real story. A slight shift of less than 20,000 votes across California, Oregon, Kentucky, North Dakota, West Virginia and Indiana would have given victory to Bryan. Outspent 10:1, and with little organization to match McKinley's "front porch campaign," Bryan's momentum spooked the Republican deep pockets. Mark Hanna, McKinley's campaign manager, raised enormous sums from Wall Street, which were used to finance an army of 1,400 anti-Bryan speakers and a widespread variety of "dirty tricks." Post-election analysis cast a pall of doubt on the McKinley results with gross election irregularities reported in Indiana, Ohio and Illinois. Comparisons to 1876 were common. Some observers stated that 1896 showed a premeditated "fix" had rigged the outcome in advance, whereas twenty years earlier the dirty work was done after the election. Money and raw power were becoming more sophisticated in denying the will of the people (see Election of 1876). www.agribusinesscouncil.org/election_of_1896.htm
] Auto answered|Score .6|achazia24|Points 270|Note:
I'm sorry that that wasn't a good answer. Please hold on while I contact an expert.Weegy:
A watershed Election is one that changes history. The candidate has a campaign that decides the course of politics for decades; one that is especially memorable, or that proves to be a dividing line between historical periods. [ The election of 1896 was just that.
The depression of the 1890s, and President Cleveland’s unwillingness to use federal resources to assist the unemployed, alienated irate farmers and workers from the Democratic Party. During the 1892 and 1894 elections, Democrats suffered large Congressional seat losses while Republicans and Populists each achieved significant gains.
As the presidential election of 1896 drew closer and political leaders worked to define party platforms, currency standards became the hottest issue. While Republicans endorsed the gold standard to win east coast industrialist votes, Populists continued to support unlimited silver coinage to increase the money supply. Democrats, meanwhile, were split as they struggled to find a common direction for their party and overcome the unpopular actions and policies of the Cleveland administration.
At the Democratic convention in Chicago, the commanding presence of William Jennings Bryan captured the attention of the delegates as he spoke in favor of using the ratio of 16 ounces of silver to 1 ounce of gold to create coins. Bryan’s support of silver over gold angered those who favored only gold, commonly called Goldbugs. But through a series of speeches, primarily in the south and west where farmers and silver miners lived, support for Bryan’s plan grew rapidly.
Many considered the 36-year-old, two-term congressman from Nebraska one of the best speakers of the day. Bryan rose to national prominence when he fought for the repeal of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, which required the treasury to purchase 4.5 million ounces of silver each month. The agreement, he claimed, would have a harmful inflationary impact on the economy. www.studymode.com/essays/The-Election-Of-1896-Essay-976317.html
] Expert answered|Marvel2|Points 253|
All Categories|No Subcategories|Expert answered|Rating 0| 5/4/2013 11:28:45 AM