Abraham Lincoln’s 1860 Campaign
"Woodchopper of the West"
Abraham Lincoln was the 16th President of the United States,
serving from 1861 until his assassination in 1865. Lincoln was considered the
underdog when he ran for President because he was a newcomer to politics and
lacked experience. However, his message was plain and simple: preserve the
Union at all costs, even if it meant going to war. He defeated the southern
Democratic nominee John C. Breckinridge, the Democratic nominee Stephen A. Douglas,
and the Constitutional Union nominee John Bell in the 1860 election because
of his effective campaign strategies.
Marcus
Cicero, a Roman philosopher, wrote a letter over 2000 years ago to his brother
who was running for office. In Cicero’s letter, he told his brother in order to
win the election; he must secure the support of his friends and win over the
general public. In order to do so, he gave his brother many recommendations
ranging from adapting to each person he met by changing his expression and
speech when necessary to sticking to vague generalities when describing his
agenda. Cicero’s campaign techniques are still being practiced in politics
today. Abraham Lincoln’s campaign subconsciously followed Cicero’s advice, resulting
in his nomination by an electoral landslide. Stephen A. Douglas, John C.
Breckinridge, and John Bell, on the other hand, ran terrible, boring campaigns
that lacked the passion and freshness the Lincoln campaign possessed. John C.
Breckinridge only gave a handful of speeches. John Bell gave vague speeches
that did not offer solutions to the growing resentment between the North and
the South. Stephen A. Douglas’ speeches focused more on uniting the fractured
Democratic Party than trying to win over Northern votes.
Abraham Lincoln was fifty-one, a newcomer to national politics and had no political
foes when he ran for office. This was Lincoln’s first step in the right
direction to win the election. Cicero stated in his letter that the more
enemies you make, the less chance you have of winning. Lincoln was skillful in
debate. As a self made man, he appealed to common people in the West. Cicero also pointed out that appealing to the hoi polloi
greatly benefits the candidate because if voters feel they can connect with the
candidate and not feel the candidate is only on the side of the extremely
wealthy, they would be more likely to support that candidate. Lincoln himself
decided not to write or make any points on specific doctrine lest his opponents
distort his remarks. Lincoln greatly benefited from this because Stephen A.
Douglas was unable to successfully attack Lincoln on any of his policies.
In the 1860 election, Abraham
Lincoln’s most valuable campaign technique was candidate image. Lincoln
appealed to many different voters, especially the common man. One day, a news
reporter went to Lincoln’s home in Illinois and reported what he saw as a
“magnificent spectacle.” The reporter wrote, “There stood Honest Old Abe in his
shirt sleeves, a pair of leather home-made suspenders holding up a pair of home-made
pantaloons, the seat of which was neatly patched. ” This reporter portrayed
Lincoln as a true American. Lincoln was also a rail-splitter, and this helped to
promote his image as a tough American who could take on the challenge of
preserving the Union.
One of the many
reasons Stephen A. Douglas lost to Abraham Lincoln was because of the
desperation Douglas showed during his campaign. Douglas was the first
presidential candidate in American history to make a nationwide tour in person,
an act not traditionally done at the time. Lincoln, who stayed with campaign tradition,
stayed at home in Springfield and received delegates who came to pay their
respect. Many
newspapers began to notice Douglas’ desperation. The Illinois Gazette even
said, “There is Douglas strolling around the country begging for votes like a
town constable.” At one point during Douglas’ campaign, he said he was going to
New York to visit his mother. However, instead of going straight to New York,
Douglas campaigned for weeks heading north to New York, making countless
speeches along the way, begging for votes. This act was met with harsh
criticism, mainly because campaigning around the country was considered disrespectful
at the time. Douglas created many enemies during his political career leading
up to the 1860 election, having a detrimental effect on his campaign. Douglas
also failed to unite his party, which ended up in two Democrats running for
office. This also helped Lincoln achieve victory.
Although
modern technology has greatly impacted the way campaigns reach out to voters,
Cicero’s key successful campaign elements are constantly being used in American
presidential campaigns. Most importantly, Cicero mentioned a candidate must
focus on the major issues impacting the people at the time. He must convince
the people that he knows exactly how to get out of whatever mess the country is
in a way that will benefit the nation as a whole. When the country is doing
well economically, the leader has to convince the people that he can continue
the forward movement of prosperity. If the time in that nation’s history is one
of great suffering, the candidate must convince the people that he can pull
them out from suffering and into prosperity. Lastly, a successful candidate has
to appeal to a broad range of people because many people tend to elect the man
who they can trust as someone who will bring of prosperity and safety.
In
the end, Lincoln’s simple message of preserving the Union backed up by his
extremely effective candidate image resulted in his victory. In his acceptance
speech, Lincoln said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe
this government cannot endure,
permanently half slave and half free." Lincoln won by more than 450,000
votes over the second place candidate, Stephen A. Douglas.
Bibliography
Boller, Paul
F., Jr. Presidential Campaigns. New
York City, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Woolley,
John, and Gerhard Peters. "Election of 1860." In American Presidency
Project. Last modified 1999. Accessed October 9, 2012.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showelection.php?year=1860
Project. Last modified 1999. Accessed October 9, 2012.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showelection.php?year=1860
American Government, s.v. "1860 Republican Party
campaign banner," Image, Library of Congress, accessed October 10, 2012. http://americangovernment.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/870147?terms=Lincoln
American Government, s.v. "Abraham Lincoln,"
accessed October 10, 2012. http://americangovernment.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/196573?terms=Lincoln
American Government, s.v. "Abraham Lincoln,"
Image, Library of Congress, accessed October 10, 2012. http://americangovernment.abcclio.com/Search/Display/198409?terms=Lincoln
Great Post, Will! A lot of the things that you pointed out connect to the Obama campaign, which I studied. Like Lincoln, Obama was a relatively young candidate who gained a lot of support throughout his campaign. Both candidates developed a successful image that appealed to voters, Lincoln as and honest and self-made man, and Obama as a youthful and inspiring candidate. While Lincoln structured his campaign on preserving the nation, and Obama preached change and moving forward throughout his, both candidates gave voters a promising outlook for the future if elected president.
ReplyDeleteGood post William, I like that you included some of the customs of the era and the in-depth look into the life of Lincoln. Like Ricky said, I agree that the Obama campaign shared many similarities to Lincoln in 1860, coming from being little known to the big stage at a young age and lacking enemies.
ReplyDeleteVery good post, Will. It is interesting that, similar to Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant used his image as guardian of the union and preserver of democracy to gain supporters. Another thing that intrigued me while reading was how active Lincoln was in his pursuit of the presidency compared to Grant, who was not as excited about his campaign. Lincoln actively boasted his everyman image and dream of unity, while Grant let his campaign show off his success during the Civil War as leader of the Union Army. Also, I did not realize that Lincoln lacked experience and was an underdog in the election, that was interesting.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Ricky. Both Lincoln and Obama were quite unknown at the start of the election. However, with the help developing a strong image and running on a simple yet convincing message, they were both able to sweep the elections. However, do you think Obama has used the same campaign techniques in this current election than he did when he ran in 2008?
ReplyDeleteAnother connection that I noticed between the Lincoln campaign and the Obama campaign was that neither candidate really had much to be criticized for. Both were relatively young and inexperienced, and did not seem to be attacked very much by the press or even opposing candidates. Obama's main Democratic rival, Hilary Clinton, seemed to be attacked more then Obama, who had a relatively easy time facing the press in the 2008 election. I think that this is an interesting campaigning concept, which is to campaign just enough to win. Have a clear message that you are confident in, but if you are seen as an underdog for long enough early on, the chances of being attacked by your opposition is lower. Then when the campaign nears a close is the time to go all out.
ReplyDelete