Presidential Elections tend to mirror responses to major events and more importantly, the attitudes among the American people.
When the stock market crashed in 1929, and the most devastating economic collapse in our country’s history followed, millions lost their homes, jobs, savings and their lives. People wanted to see immediate change and results from the government. Even though the current President, Herbert Hoover, was not responsible for this collapse and had actually expanded government in many ways throughout his presidency, he was blamed for it and labeled as a 'laissez-faire' capitalist. Consequently, an incredibly unlikable President Hoover left office and Franklin Delano Roosevelt took his place. FDR won because he promised many social programs designed to give people jobs and stimulate the economy, while also expanding the government greatly. At the time, many of these ideas were radical changes, but they worked. America soared out of the great depression and right into becoming the most economically powerful and prosperous nation on earth. FDR, known as one of the most memorable and favorable presidents, most likely would not have won in an election that took place during a time of economic prosperity.
In the 1970s, the country faced two major problems. The first was the economy. There was a shortage of energy like gasoline, a rising inflation rate, a staggering unemployment rate, and a total lack of confidence in the banking system among creditors and investors. Then, Ronald Reagan came along. A true fiscal conservative, Reagan promised tax cuts, government spending cuts, fewer government regulations, and a stronger military. This brings us to the second problem: the rise of the Soviet Union. While President Carter was incrementally decreasing the size of the United States military, the Soviets were loading up with 13,500 tanks, 900 ballistic missiles, and 1200 intercontinental missiles. Many Americans were worried about going to war, and if Carter continued weakening the military, they might actually lose. So, when Reagan promised to bring back the economy by downsizing government, letting people keep more of their hard-earned money, while simultaneously beefing up the American military, he won in a landslide.
Would the economy have recovered on its own without the installation of FDR’s programs? Was President Carter as responsible for the economic trouble of the ‘70s as people said he was? Who knows, and who cares. The point is, in tough times, you can always count on voters to choose candidates that promise radical and immediate changes.
The 2016 election is no different. For roughly 10 years now, the American people have seen stagnant wages, jobs shipped overseas, a growing national debt, illegal immigration worsening, costs of education and healthcare rising, and acts of terror that have become more and more frequent. These are just a few of the problems citizens are concerned with in this election. People disagree about the solutions to these problems, as many political scientists say the country is more polarized than it has ever been since the Civil War, but almost all seem to agree on this: what we have isn’t working. After years of hearing George W. Bush, a Republican, talk about how America was going to take out terrorists, the Middle East has become more unstable, extremist groups have become more powerful, and acts of terror have become more frequent around the world. A NBC News poll taken in September of 2014 found that 47 percent of Americans say the country is less safe now than it was right after the 2001 terrorist attacks. And after years of hearing Barack Obama, a Democrat, talk about reviving the economy and bringing jobs back to the middle class, unemployment has remained stagnant due to the number of people who stopped looking for work , citizens are burdened with immense amounts of college debt, and the middle class has gotten poorer.
Both Presidents used the typical polished rhetoric that politicians use when they are more concerned with being re-elected than they are with fixing problems for their people. And the people have spoken. The success of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders says that the 2016 election is not one for a positive campaign. In several of the GOP Debates, it seemed as if the winner would be whoever got the most angry at the establishment or the current president. This is a contest Donald Trump wins every single time, no matter how ridiculous his statements are. After hearing Trump label Mexicans as rapists, advocate for war crimes against terrorists’ families, and insult family members of other candidates, it is not unreasonable to believe that he could say just about whatever he wanted and his supporters would still support him. That’s how angry people are. The last thing people want to hear is something that sounds like it’s been rehearsed over and over to deceive people and win votes, or even worse, win money from Super PACs. Trump is also why 2016 may be the only election in which Bernie Sanders escapes being called the most radical candidate, depending on which end of the spectrum you place yourself. For Bernie Sanders, the anger is much more professional and mature; nonetheless, he does call for major fundamental changes that mirror existing policies in Europe, such as free universal healthcare and free college education at public universities.
Trump and Sanders often make the claim that “the system is rigged.” Trump would tell you it’s rigged because we have incompetent politicians who are just plain stupid, while Sanders would tell you that it’s rigged intentionally, to work in favor of the top 1% and the politicians themselves. There are clear differences between their analyses of the current problems, but similarities exist in that supporters of both candidates agree that we cannot afford to elect another establishment candidate to the White House. On the Republican side, there is talk of a contested convention, one where no candidate has enough delegates to win the nomination, and so the nomination is picked by a select group of delegates, given the power to vote completely inconsistent with what their people want. The fact that certain establishment Republicans like Mitt Romney are even talking about this possibility only angers people more and pushes them to support Trump. Trump and Cruz have currently taken more than 50 percent of the delegates available. The Republican Establishment has officially lost. However, the Democratic side looks slightly different. Although Senator Sanders has run a surprisingly strong campaign, he still has a lot of ground to gain if he wants to catch up to Secretary Clinton. The battle between Clinton and Sanders directly relates to an issue that has gained more attention recently- money in politics. While Clinton has accepted millions from Wall Street bankers and corporate donors, Sanders has prided himself on being funded by the people. He’s raised almost $140 million in campaign donations, which is admirable considering most people did not know who he was before he decided to run. Even if Sanders does not win, his campaign has brought attention to an issue that will have to be addressed in future elections. Trump has self-funded his campaign as a multi-billionaire, and Sanders has run on small donations by millions of people. Both have had great success. Clearly, Americans are getting tired of money in politics, and rightfully so. The Jack Abramoff scandal brought sickening details about lobbying in Congress to light and the Wall Street bailout had many wondering why taxpayers were forced to bail out fraudulent bankers that should have gone to jail. Could these bankers be buying out politicians in return for policies that favor them and only them? No, not in America! Not where the government is of the people, by the people and for the people! Right?
This election will mean many things, but above all, it will be remembered as the war on the establishment. People, both Republicans and Democrats, have lost faith in their government and even their own party. And like the elections of 1932 and 1980, the country is at a tipping point in 2016. The people have experienced hard times and are demanding results. Not just change, but radical change. Whether it be a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, or a free college education, the people want something different. On both sides, but even more so on the Republican side, there are Americans who want the establishment gone. Only time will tell if we replaced it with something better.
