|
Title: 1904 Post by: A18 on February 17, 2005, 02:18:32 PM Why did Roosevelt do so much better than McKinley?
Title: Re: 1904 Post by: skybridge on February 17, 2005, 03:26:00 PM McKinley had been dead three years.
Title: Re: 1904 Post by: Redefeatbush04 on February 17, 2005, 03:27:01 PM Mckinley didn't run in 1904. How can you win if you don't run? How can you run if you aren't alive?
Title: Re: 1904 Post by: A18 on February 17, 2005, 03:30:10 PM What are you guys smoking? I'm asking why Roosevelt got 56% in 1904 and McKinley got 51/52% in 1896/1900.
What my Roosevelt so popular? Title: Re: 1904 Post by: Redefeatbush04 on February 17, 2005, 03:33:41 PM What my Roosevelt so popular? Your Roosevelt? You were as alive in 1904 as Mckinley was Title: Re: 1904 Post by: skybridge on February 17, 2005, 03:53:20 PM What are you guys smoking? I'm asking why Roosevelt got 56% in 1904 and McKinley got 51/52% in 1896/1900. What my Roosevelt so popular? Just ask some Democrats today which Republican presidents they liked. One of them will most likely be Teddy. Title: Re: 1904 Post by: jimrtex on February 17, 2005, 04:04:16 PM Why did Roosevelt do so much better than McKinley? Look in particular at the western states. In 1908, Taft equaled Roosevelt's vote, and Bryan ran 1.4 million ahead of Parker. Title: Re: 1904 Post by: PBrunsel on February 17, 2005, 04:57:46 PM In 1904 the Democrats knew they were dead in the water because of:
1. Nostalgia for McKinley, much like the JFK nostalgia in 1964. 2. TR was more popular than Bryan with the common man. 3. TR had taken Democratic reforms and rode with them. Alton Parker was a sacrfificial lamb candidate and he knew it, that's why he refused to campaign until late October. |