Champ Clark - Conservative?

[Mikestone8]

Looking back over some old WIs about the 1912 election, I notice that Champ Clark, Wilson's principal rival for the Democratic nomination, is often referred to as a "conservative" who would supposedly have lost a lot of Progressive Dems to TR in November.

Can anyone explain where this idea comes from? From what I can gather, Clark was always on the Progressive wing of the party, and a firm supporter of WJ Bryan until they fell out at the 1912 convention. If anything, his public image seems to have been slightly to the left of Wilson, who kept firmly to the middle of the road during the campaign.

(Incidentally, I'm not sure it makes much difference anyway. Even had the "conservative" label stuck, Clark is hardly likely to do any worse than Parker in 1904, who polled about four percent less than Wilson in 1912. Even if all of these votes switched to TR rather than the ex-Democrat Debs, that  would still leave Clark about six percentage points ahead.)

Any thoughts on how his presidency goes?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I suspect that the reasons are either Clark's opposition to the idea of a Federal Reserve Bank or that Bryan denounced him as a tool of Wall Street at the 1912 DNC after Tammany Hall threw New York's votes behind him.  Sort of ironic, since Clark opposed creating a Federal Reserve Bank because he thought it would be dominated by eastern banks.

[Mikestone8]

I suspect that the reasons are either Clark's opposition to the idea of a Federal Reserve Bank or that Bryan denounced him as a tool of Wall Street at the 1912 DNC after Tammany Hall threw New York's votes behind him.  Sort of ironic, since Clark opposed creating a Federal Reserve Bank because he thought it would be dominated by eastern banks.

Could well be.

I have also wondered whether Wilson's long-established staus as a liberal icon has led to an unconscious assumption that any oponent of his must have been some kind of reactionary, and the assumption has gone relatively unchallenged because those interested in the 1912 election are apt to be obsessed with TR almost to the exclusion of anyone else, so that Clark (imho the real alternative to Wilson) gets neglected.

[feeblepizza]

Wilson did not keep "firmly to the middle of the road." He campaigned as a leftist.

[Psychic Octopus]

Clark was also a non-interventionist (at least in terms of Europe) who didn't want to get involved in WWI. That might help solidify some peoples' opinions that he was to the right of Wilson. It's wrong, since he was a progressive, it's just that he was of a different breed.

IIRC, it was assumed at the time Bryan would endorse him.

Clark's presidency has the possibility of massive butterflies. It's likely that we don't intervene militarily in WWI, and even possible we stay out altogether. Probably a victory for the Central Powers, or at least a compromise peace.

[Mikestone8]

There could be domestic butterflies too.

In Feb 1913, the Senate passed a Constitutional Amendment limiting the President to a single six-year term. Democrats were strongly in support (only one voted nay) while Republicans were about equally divided. As the HoR was heavily Democratic, passage there seemed a foregone conclusion.

At this point, President-elect Wilson intervened, writing to the Chairman of the relevant House Committee to ask the the Amendment go no further. This despite its being part of the Democratic platform on which he had just been elected. The Chairman concurred, and the Amendment never came to a vote. The term limits issue died until FDR brought it back to life in the 40s.

Clark, OTOH, was on record in support of the Amendment (as was Bryan) and would certainly not have intervened as Wilson did. Indeed, as Speaker of the House, would probably have piloted it through. So he serves until March 1919, and then retires for good. Subsequent presidential years are 1918, 1924, 1930 - - - interesting to say the least.

Clark's presidency also delays or prevents the advent of the Federal Reserve, but I haven't a clue what the side-effects of that might be.

[Psychic Octopus]

I didn't remember if Clark supported it or not, but I remember Bryan being a proponent. I'm not sure blockage of the Federal Reserve's creation will last much longer though, since there were many elements advocating it after the 1907 Panic.

[Mikestone8]

I didn't remember if Clark supported it or not, but I remember Bryan being a proponent. I'm not sure blockage of the Federal Reserve's creation will last much longer though, since there were many elements advocating it after the 1907 Panic.

Agreed. Probably Clark will be talked into it, though under him its composition may be different.  If not it will come under his successor.

Still, the six-year term is a big enough butterfly to  be going on with.

[feeblepizza]

Clark's presidency also delays or prevents the advent of the Federal Reserve, but I haven't a clue what the side-effects of that might be.

Well, we would have a stable economy right about now.

[Mikestone8]

Clark was also a non-interventionist (at least in terms of Europe) who didn't want to get involved in WWI. That might help solidify some peoples' opinions that he was to the right of Wilson. It's wrong, since he was a progressive, it's just that he was of a different breed.

IIRC, it was assumed at the time Bryan would endorse him.

Clark's presidency has the possibility of massive butterflies. It's likely that we don't intervene militarily in WWI, and even possible we stay out altogether. Probably a victory for the Central Powers, or at least a compromise peace.

Much depends on how he handles the earlier part of the war, and especially the Lusitania business. By 1917, Wilson had pretty much talked himself into a corner on the submarine question, and when the Germans resumed USW he couldn't swallow it without humiliation. So it's a question of whether Clark in 1915 would have sent a Lusitania note similar to Wilson's, or something more in line with what Bryan would have wanted. Much also depends on who his Sec of State is. I gather that William Randolph Hearst was mentioned for that job. If he gets it, he'll be firmly against war with Germany, but there may be one with Mexico instead.