Every election in the history of America has similarities, from Washington to Obama. The election of 1844 was no exception to the rule. There were four candidates, Polk, Clay, Birney, and Smith. All of the candidates knew the issues of the day, and focused their platforms around these issues, even the small ones. The results clearly reflect the American people's opinion of the candidate, and the candidate's beliefs, as in every election. The election of 1844 is often overlooked, because it was not as eventful as some others, but it could have been the most vital election in regards to the survival of The United States of America.
In the election of 1844, there were four primary candidates running for office; James K. Polk, Henry Clay, James G. Birney, and the Prophet Joseph Smith. James K Polk, a Democrat from Tennessee, was considered a "dark horse" candidate, winning on the ninth ballot. In other words, Polk was a last resort nomination for the Democratic Party. Other nominees for the candidacy were Martin Van Buren, Lewis Cass, and James Buchannan. Van Buren did not want the annexation of Texas, and that lost him the candidacy, and Cass and Buchannan did not win the two-thirds vote needed to win the nomination. As Speaker of the House, Polk was well known. He also became the novice of former President Andrew Jackson. Polk's running mate was Pennsylvania lawyer, George Dallas. Third time presidential candidate, Henry Clay from Kentucky, was the Whig nominee. Rumored to be a drunkard and a womanizer, his running mate was well-known, devout Christian Theodore Frelinghuysen, and New Jersey senator. Current president, John Tyler, could have been nominated as the Whig candidate, had he not changed his values to meet Democratic standards. The Whig Party no longer supported Tyler, and the easy choice was Clay for the candidacy. The abolitionist Liberty Party's candidate for the presidency was James G. Birney. He may have had no challengers for the nomination, but he was also not very well known throughout the country, as opposed to Clay, and Polk. Birney's running mate was Thomas Morris from Ohio. There was also another independent running party, run by candidate Prophet Joseph Smith. Smith was a Latter-day Saint from Missouri who had been prosecuted for his beliefs, and wanted to speak out against mistreatment. He did not have a vice presidential candidate, but rather a consul known as The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. All four were superior candidates for the President of the United States, as the people would soon learn.
The people of the United States had many needs, and the Parties each did their best to appeal to the largest amount of Americans possible. During the election, there were many differing standpoints on the many predicaments within the country as well as surrounding territories. Polk was an obdurate advocate for the annexation of the Texas and Oregon Territories. Democratic supporters created many slogans for Polk, including "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight!" "Polk, Dallas, and Texas!" [i] The name Dallas is in the slogan as a reference to the running mate of Polk. "Texas or Disunion." And "Polk, Dallas, and the tariff of '42." Henry Clay did not believe in the annexation of Texas or Oregon. He mainly focused on The American System, an enhancement of canals, railroads, and standard roads within the country [ii] . This movement gained Clay a large amount of his followers, as it was focused on the country in its present state. The Whig party had very little to say on the subject of slavery, as Clay owned many slaves himself [iii] . The Liberty Party, on the other hand, were strong promoters of the abolitionist movement. Birney believed slavery to be unconstitutional, within the states, as well as territories. Smith was also a strong supporter of the end to slavery, though Smith's platform was primarily concerned with the president himself and the powers given to him. His party felt that the president should be the only power needed to declare laws, war, etc. Thus eliminating Congress from most decisions. He also wanted to change the amount of representatives in Congress, as well as their pay. In addition, Smith wanted a strong prison reform, and a national bank. Smith agreed with Polk on the subject of annexation, and believed that it should be an action taken sooner rather than later. Each candidate had the nation's best interest at heart, but had different ways of going about it. Some focused largely on foreign issues, where others stayed closer to home with domestic issues.
The chief issues concerning the people of America in 1844 were those of annexation, and the abolishing of slavery. Polk, from the very beginning was a strong believer in the annexation of other territories [iv] . Polk felt annexation was needed as a large economic advancement, as well as more land for more people. Not only did he want the territories to belong to the US, Polk felt that the territories should become states eventually. Whig nominee Clay decided to "straddle" the issue of annexation. He made his ideas seem neutral through confusing letters, saying he agreed with annexation, only if postponed. Neither Polk nor Clay said anything on the topic of slavery, as they both has slaves. The issue had become a more prominent problem in the country as of late due to the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Tariffs were also a recurring problem that all of the candidates readily avoided. Birney's first and foremost belief was the abolishing of slavery. Never really speaking on the issue of expansion, he was a primary advocate for abolition [v] . Smith believed in both the annexation of the territories, as well as the abolishing of slavery. The North largely supported those candidates who believed in the abolishing of slavery, but did not like the idea of gaining the territories of Texas and Oregon. The South wanted slavery to stay in the same condition it had been in for decades, and strongly supported the annexation of Texas and Oregon. Not one candidate felt the same way about the primary issues of the day, allowing the country a wide variety of options to choose from.
There were no magnificent orators who ran for the election of 1844, leaving speeches behind for the nation to cherish. Instead, the campaign consisted of party-to-party, word of mouth, mockery, and support from past supporters. The Whig party had nothing to hold against the "new kid on the block" and resorted to incessant mockery. "Who is James K. Polk?" "James K. Who?" "Ha, ha, ha. What a nominees is James K. Polk from Tennessee?" In contrast, the Democratic Party could easily find many skeletons in the closet of old Henry Clay. The Democrats would simply bring Clay's moral character into question. Jeers that Clay was the "inventor of poker", a womanizer, and a drunkard were all very popular among the Democrats. They would also mention the "corrupt bargain" of 1924, when Clay's name came up in conversation. Who would want a corrupt drunkard running the country? Since Polk and Clay did not find Birney or Smith as immediate threats, nothing malicious was ever said in their direction. Smith's campaign did happen to abruptly in June of 1844. Smith was assassinated at the Carthage Jail in Illinois by a mob of close to 150 men [vi] . Smith was a Latter Day Saint who was persecuted by the state of Missouri, and wanted to speak out against mistreatment. Many felt he may have won the next election, had he been able to run. The campaign was not necessarily bitter, but more a mess that was muddled through for a year.
Thought the campaign was generally (murky), the voters proved loyal, and the results were clear. A substantially greater amount of voters were present for the current election of 1844, then the former of 1840 [vii] . Where only 2,412,694 were counted for the election of 1840, 2,703,864 were counted in the election of 1844. The demographics of the states essentially flipped between the two elections, and again in 1848. The only states to vote Democrat in 1840 were Illinois, Missouri, Alabama, Virginia, Arizona, and New Hampshire; only managing to reach six of twenty-five states [viii] . In 1844, the tides turned, and the states voting Whig were North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, averaging out to eleven of twenty-five states. However, in 1848, the voting patterns appeared more evenly distributed between the Whigs and the Democrats. 2,876,818 votes were counted, even after Texas was added to the Union [ix] . Even so, the electoral votes are more revealing as to how the elections played out, and how the President won. In 1840, the Whig's won with an electoral vote of 234 to 60, a mandate win. In 1844, the Democratic Party won 170 to 105 [x] . In 1848, the Whig party won on a very close margin of 36 electoral votes at 163 to 127. The election between Polk and Clay was very close as well, with only a 65-vote difference. The only obstacle possibly impairing the results would be the third-party candidates, who were never large enough to receive any electoral votes. Polk won the election with just over 50% of the popular vote, making him a minority president. Clay had 48% of the popular vote and could very well have won, if it had not been for third-party candidate James. G. Birney. Birney gathered 2% of the popular vote, swaying the election [xi] . Polk did not win over his home states of North Carolina and Tennessee, but did happen to win over a majority of the country (see map). Clay could have won had he not waffled his decision on the annexation of surrounding territories. Birney won the votes of some New Yorkers, all abolitionists. It is likely that Polk won because he was a new face, a change in the norms.
It is also believed that the President Barack Obama has won based on differences. In 2012, the presidential candidates were the current President, Barack Obama, and the Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney. President Obama's winning could be compared to James K. Polk's win in 1844 simply in why they won. Neither of their opponents, Romney or Clay, had very decisive tactics. Obama said he supported better health care from the very beginning, and stayed with his statement all throughout his campaign [xii] . Polk was very similar in the way he supported the annexation of Texas and Oregon. Similar comparisons could be made with Romney and Clay, although they would be quite the opposite as well. These candidates never quite mad a strong statement on their beliefs. Instead of having a hard and fast plan regarding the issues of the day, the men beat around the bush. Romney, at first, said he wanted a large tax put on middle class families, with no extra taxes for the rich. Only to turn around and say that this was never the case. Clay was in the same boat 168 years earlier. Clay said one thing about the expansion of America, and contradicted himself down the road on a large scale. The results of both elections reflected the attitudes of the American people toward the candidates. It would seem that the results would be at one extreme or the other, oddly enough, this was not the case for either election. Luckily for both Romney and Clay, the results cut close. Both men had a fair chance of winning, having only lost by a small number. Not only were the candidates, and results similar, but the campaign itself was as well. Nothing about the election for 1844 was particularly memorable, when referring to the forerunners Polk, and Clay. The same could be said for the campaign of 2012. Though, some of the debates became heated. Obama, and Romney's debates were either very mundane, or very eventful. In either election, anything worthy of note never took place. In all, the two elections were very similar in many ways, and the results reflected the beliefs of each candidate.
The election of 1844 was especially important due to the aspect of expansionism. Had the election gone in the other direction, America may not be the country it is today. Even though the election tends to be overlooked, its legacy remains a literal part of the country every day. The people of America in 1844 realized the need for expansion, and elected Polk as the president, who expanded America largely, to where it is now. No one election should be regarded as more or less important. Every election is equally just as similar, and important to America's history.
xiii
Picture 3.png
Madison Moretz
November 20, 2012
Semester Paper, APUSHBibliography
