A Moderate History of the G.O.P. - Part One
Picking up where we left off, we'll start with the 1948 presidential campaign. Obviously, each election period covered includes much more detail than I've written, but my purpose here isn't to dissect each election precisely, but to simply show you the consistent broad patterns. The Republican Party has its own agenda, and it's often much different than that of its constituents.
1948 Presidential Election:
Two years earlier in 1946, the Republican Party finally won a major election, campaigning on the slogan "Had Enough?"
- Had enough debt?
- Had enough inflation?
- Had enough strikes?
- Had enough communism?
The American Communist Party had broad and open influence in the trade unions, and big (politically motivated) strikes were causing economic slowdowns. Inflation was also running at 12+ percent, and President Truman was considered ("babying") weak in dealing with the Soviet Union.
Led by the very popular and principled conservative Senator Robert Taft, the Congress achieved their greatest record since the turn of the century. For the first time since the New Deal passed taxes were lowered, the budget was balanced, and the national debt had been reduced. Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White and other communist infiltrators working in high-ranking government positions had been exposed, the Taft-Hartley Act was passed, and the 22nd Amendment limiting the office of president to only 2 terms passed among many other accomplishments.
There was growing resentment among conservatives against the "me-too" (moderate) candidates, but still, things never looked better than they did for the Republican Party heading into the '48 election! Despite the strong revolt by conservative grassroots against nominating "me-too" losers, the pundits and that subtle propaganda machine, the Gallup Poll, went into overdrive assuring the public that the "only candidate that could win" had to a) maintain foreign policy, b) support the New Deal, and c) appeal to left-leaning Democrats and progressives. Where have I heard this before?
As if by magic, the "me-too" loser from the last election, Thomas E. Dewey, won the nomination yet again! In making sure they would secure the win, one of Dewey's managers made a deal with Congressman Charles Halleck that if he delivered the Indiana delegation for Dewey, he would get the Vice Presidential nod. This didn't sit well with the "kingmakers," and the next morning The New York Times declared:
Surely not Mr. Halleck! Mr. Halleck would bring into the campaign the perfect record of a Republican isolationist. Mr. Halleck voted against Selective Service in the summer of 1940 ... He voted against Lend-Lease ... He voted against the British loan ... he led the fight to cut appropriations under the Marshall Plan ...
Sounds like my kinda guy! But of course all the mainstream pundits jumped on the anti-Halleck bandwagon, and the "kingmakers" chose Earl Warren in his place. For their campaign platform, both Dewey and Warren promised not to mention the hottest issue of the day - the communist infiltration of the federal government.
Despite their popular track-record, Truman's campaign strategy was to run against the Republican Congress. Not once did Dewey defend the Republican Congress. He also refused to debate the communist infiltration problem in the government. The Democrats were deeply divided at this time too. In the south, they supported Strom Thurmond, and the far-left radicals supported Socialist Henry Wallace. It was almost impossible for the Republicans to lose this election. But Dewey, the "me-too" candidate, supported the same policies as Truman, including the continued "America Last foreign policy," and of course ... Dewey lost.
1952 Presidential Election:
The Truman administration had been full of scandal, communist infiltration, and weakened by the unpopular Korean War. The acknowledged and undisputed leader of the Republican Party was now Senator Robert Taft! He was a man respected by both friends and enemies, and carried overwhelming grassroots support. Almost everyone thought he was a shoe-in for the Republican nomination.
This "kingmakers" weren't thrilled with his huge popularity. Taft was a man they could not control. He was dedicated to reducing government spending, lowering taxes, and against the "America Last foreign policy" that had been a constant now for decades. Taft's own book, "A Foreign Policy for America," was based on the following premise:
The ultimate purpose of our foreign policy must be to protect the liberty of the people of the United States.
So the "kingmakers," with the help of party leadership, went full guns against Taft starting with the slogan "I like Taft, but Taft can't win!" They had their own man in mind, he was General Dwight Eisenhower.
Eisenhower was a good and honest man, but was also politically naive. He had no idea of the backroom tactics used to steal the nomination from Taft that pushed him into the presidency. The "kingmakers" had had their eye on him for awhile. A couple of them being trustees at Columbia University, had placed him in the position of president of the university a few years before.
In order to be sure they could control the delegation, they persuaded Thomas E. Dewey to run for governor of New York. Lieutenant Governor Joe R. Hanley, who had been promised the candidacy, was browbeat into withdrawing by direct order of Winthrop Aldridge of Chase National Bank (yes, Rockefeller's bank). Then the propaganda machine that made Wendell Willkie an overnight sensation, went into turbo-charge promoting Ike.
Madison Avenue public relations firms got to it, and soon every major newspaper and all the major national magazines, began building up the Eisenhower image. Month after month, Eisenhower's picture was on the cover of magazines. Everywhere you read there were articles supporting Ike for the Republican nomination. But that wasn't enough ... because Taft was still leading the primaries.
The dirty tactics against Taft started during the New Hampshire primary in early '52. Eisenhower supporter Tex McCrary later admitted as much, saying:
I planted people in every Taft audience. I would have mothers get up to say, 'I have a son who is being drafted - and he wants to ask you why your voting record is the same as Marcantonio's'.
Congressman Vito Marcantonio was a radical, pro-communist Democrat. Taft's voting record was the complete opposite of his! Then Arthur Hays Sulzberger, publisher of The New York Times said his newspaper opposed Taft's nomination "because it is so frightened at the thought of Mr. Taft." Heading into the Texas primary Taft was still in the lead, so the "kingmakers" brewed up another scheme.
They ran advertisements in Texas newspapers and mailed mass quantities of postcards to invite Democrats to come to the Republican Party meetings and vote for Eisenhower. The ads stated:
You are not pledged to support the nominee of the Republican Party nor does it prohibit you from voting in the July Democratic Primary nor does it prohibit you from voting for whomever you please in the November election.
These fraudulent ads represented that Democrats - who intended to remain Democrats - could elect delegates in the Republican National Convention. This was explicitly against Texas law, so Taft and his supporters started protesting this illegal attempt to ignore his legally-elected delegates. Next, the Houston Post reported on "the big steal," accusing Taft of stealing delegates! Oveta Culp Hobby, the owner of the Houston Post, would later be appointed as Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. Mere coincidence?
Every newspaper across the country picked up the story! TIME Magazine even ran a special Monday edition accusing Taft of "the big steal," the week of the Republican Convention. Protesters with guns in their hands marched the streets of Chicago (where the convention was held), raising signs that said "Taft Steals Votes!" When the illegal delegates showed up to the convention, they were quickly seated in place of the Taft delegates ... yet Taft continued to hold a narrow lead.
Contrary to common practice and tradition, a sudden convention rule change was enacted under the Orwellian-name of the "fair play amendment." The pressure put on convention delegates regarding the contested delegates was apparent to everyone who attended. The Credentials Committee was called to hold a hearing, and the judge (a Pennsylvania representative and Eisenhower supporter) ruled in Taft's favor after hearing all the evidence, and awarded the delegates to Senator Robert Taft. The very next morning, after receiving significant pressure from Pennsylvania Governor John Fine, he returned to the hearing and promptly reversed his decision, and the illegal delegates were seated.
Dewey was at the convention too, reminding his New York delegation that he had "a long memory," and that anyone who crossed him better be prepared to lose his job, have a relative lose his job, or even a friend lose their job too. Eisenhower won the nomination, and later in the fall of 1952, Taft described what happened himself:
First, it was the power of the New York financial interests and a large number of businessmen subject to New York influence ... Second, four-fifths of the influential newspapers in the country were opposed to me continuously and vociferously and many turned themselves into propaganda sheets for my opponent.
The making of a moral issue out of the Texas case was only possible because every internationalist paper sent special writers to blow up a contest which ordinarily would have been settled fairly by the National Committee and the Credentials Committee ... If there had not been these issues, the publicity firms would have invented others to be shouted by the pro-Eisenhower press.
Eisenhower set out campaigning on the Republican Party's "me-too" platform, but quickly realized things weren't going well. Not able to gain any ground against Truman, General Eisenhower decided to take over his own campaign, and reached out to Taft for help. Together, they wrote the Morningside Declaration:
General Eisenhower will give this country an administration inspired by Republican principles of continued and expanding liberty for all as against the continued growth of New Deal socialism which we would suffer under Governor Stevenson, representative of the left-wingers, if not a left-winger himself.
Eisenhower approved the campaign slogan of "Corruption, Communism, and Korea," and to the dread of the "kingmakers," the Republican Party closed ranks and the American people were offered the choice they had been denied over the last 4 elections! The result? A massive victory for Eisenhower!
Starting to pick up any patterns here? Foreign policy, the New Deal, and moderate ("me-too") candidates supported by the Establishment ... yet Eisenhower won in spite of their wishes, on a solidly conservative platform.
Everything I've written so far in this series, was mainstream news at the time. No tin-foil hats needed! It should, however, make you wonder why topics like this are considered today, as "over-the-top" tin-foil hat conspiracy theory. I certainly find it strange.
We'll continue with the Moderate History of the G.O.P. in Part Three.
