1896 election

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

why did Bryan do so well out west? I mean, he got over 80% in Utah!

[PBrunsel]

Bryan was for free silver, low tariffs, and lower railway rates.

At the time of 1896 the nation was in an economic slump. This slump, known as the Depression of 1893, affected farmers out west the most. President Cleveland had raised tariffs to prevent the British from dumping goods, and he had been unable to stop high railway rates. Farmers out west had had enough of the gold standard because gold helped businessmen more than it helped them. As Bryan put out, silver out numbered gold 8-1 in the U.S., and Bryan’s pro-silver standard ideas caught fire in the minds of westerners. In Nevada, silver dominated state, Bryan was hailed as such a hero when he visited in October 1896 that some started to kiss his feet! A silver standard would give more money to the westerners because they had silver in their states. Bryan promised low railway rates so goods from the West could be transported easier.

In 1896 the Populist Party, extremely popular in the west, had endorsed Bryan instead of re-nominating General James Weaver of Iowa. This gave Bryan a huge boost in the West.

[zachman]

What's amazing is how his western support faded by the 1900 election.

[PBrunsel]

What's amazing is how his western support faded by the 1900 election.

That was due to the economy coming back. Free silver and low railroad rates were not as important when farmers had full pocket books

[cwelsch]

The West used to be really poor in cash and resentful of the East (especially Wall Street) but have a lot of land.  So what's great when you have little cash and lots of non-cash assets?  Inflation!  They wanted to bankrupt the people they thought were exploiting them - bankers and the government - and still be okay because of their land.

The point of inflation (free silver) is illustrated by an anecdote from Weimar Germany, which exerienced horrible post-WWI inflation.  Two brothers inherited large sums of money when their father died.  The button-down, straight-laced brother responsibly invested his inheritance in blue chips and a broad portfolio.  The other brother was less responsible, a bit of a drunkard and a playboy, and he bought an impressively stocked wine cellar.  A few years later inflation all but destroyed the German economy and cash was more useful as toilet paper than a currency.  The brother who invested his money now owned stocks and accounts full of worthless money that might have bought him a meal or two if he scrimped.  The brother who bought a wine cellar had hard commodies, and if anything the wine had appreciated in value.  The result?  The hard assets held value, just like farmland and rachland, but the cash lost it, like bank accounts and stocks.


This explains why they wanted free silver: their land would hold value, cash wouldn't.  Result?  Landholders gain, cash-holders lose.

And then of course, like Brunsel said, states like Nevada (and Wyoming, I think) had a lot of silver, so use of silver would greatly benefit them.


Really it's a case of identity.  The Westerners identified with the Silver and Populist parties, they saw Bryan as their candidate, so they loved him.  Just like the Democrats were the Party of the South from at least 1880 to the 1950s or 1960s.  It's an identity thing.

Eventually the West realigns with the classical liberals in the GOP and elects them in droves, especially for their pro-women's suffrage planks.