Best President of the Progressive Era, and Why? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 03:04:06 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Best President of the Progressive Era, and Why? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Which of the following Presidents of the Progressive Era was the best?
#1
William McKinley
 
#2
Theodore Roosevelt
 
#3
William Howard Taft
 
#4
Woodrow Wilson
 
#5
Warren G. Harding
 
#6
Calvin Coolidge
 
#7
Herbert Hoover
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 72

Author Topic: Best President of the Progressive Era, and Why?  (Read 22978 times)
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,310
United States


« on: October 14, 2012, 03:51:51 PM »

McKinley.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,310
United States


« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2012, 06:44:17 PM »

I only see three presidents as being part of the progressive era. TR, Taft and Wilson. McKinley was Guilded Age, Harding and Coolidge were Return to Normalicy and Hoover is part of the Depression Era. Thus the best would be Taft by a mile. Wilson was the worst.

The "Progressive Era" is typically measured by historians as being 1896-1932, an era that basically consisted of Republican domination of politics and a new type of political alignment--urban Republicans vs. agrarian Democrats.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,310
United States


« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2012, 01:41:35 PM »

I only see three presidents as being part of the progressive era. TR, Taft and Wilson. McKinley was Guilded Age, Harding and Coolidge were Return to Normalicy and Hoover is part of the Depression Era. Thus the best would be Taft by a mile. Wilson was the worst.

The "Progressive Era" is typically measured by historians as being 1896-1932, an era that basically consisted of Republican domination of politics and a new type of political alignment--urban Republicans vs. agrarian Democrats.

Not really. The Progressive Era is typically considered the period between Teddy Roosevelt's ascension to the Presidency and the outbreak of WWI. The longest I've seen it is 1900 to 1920, but nothing I've seen includes the 1920s, which were decidedly not part of the same political era. The Progressive Era itself is just sort of a blip in the otherwise Long Gilded Age that starts in 1877 and ends in 1933.

Tell me these are part of the same party system:



Wikipedia on the 4th Party System:
"Dominant personalities included presidents William McKinley (R), Theodore Roosevelt (R) and Woodrow Wilson (D), three-time presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan (D), and Wisconsin's progressive Republican Robert M. LaFollette."

Wikipedia on the Progressive Era:
"The national political leaders included Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M. La Follette, Sr., Charles Evans Hughes and Herbert Hoover on the Republican side, and William Jennings Bryan, Woodrow Wilson and Al Smith on the Democratic side."

As well, both cite 1932 as the definitive end of either the system, or the era.

Wikipedia on the Progressive Era:
"There is general agreement that that the era was over by 1932, especially since a majority of the remaining progressives opposed the New Deal."

Wikipedia on the 4th Party System:
"It included the Progressive Era, World War I, and the start of the Great Depression. The Great Depression caused a realignment that produced the Fifth Party System, dominated by the Democratic New Deal Coalition until the 1960s."

The sub-article Business Progressivism in the 1920's states:
"What historians have identified as "business progressivism", with its emphasis on efficiency and typified by Henry Ford and Herbert Hoover reached an apogee in the 1920s. Wik, for example, argues that Ford's "views on technology and the mechanization of rural America were generally enlightened, progressive, and often far ahead of his times."
Tindall stresses the continuing importance of the Progressive movement in the South in the 1920s involving increased democracy, efficient government, corporate regulation, social justice, and governmental public service. William Link finds political progressivism dominant in most of the South in the 1920s. Likewise it was influential in Midwest.[81]
Historians of women and of youth emphasize the strength of the progressive impulse in the 1920s. Women consolidated their gains after the success of the suffrage movement, and moved into causes such as world peace, good government, maternal care (the Sheppard–Towner Act of 1921), and local support for education and public health. The work was not nearly as dramatic as the suffrage crusade, but women voted and operated quietly and effectively. Paul Fass, speaking of youth, says "Progressivism as an angle of vision, as an optimistic approach to social problems, was very much alive." The international influences which had sparked a great many reform ideas likewise continued into the 1920s, as American ideas of modernity began to influence Europe.
There is general agreement that that the era was over by 1932, especially since a majority of the remaining progressives opposed the New Deal."
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,310
United States


« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2013, 09:55:58 AM »

Tell me these are part of the same party system:



Those are easily part of the same party system.  Solid South vs. Republican New England and (mostly) Midwest; populist strength in the West (whether that be the Populist Party or a Democrat who is the de facto Populist candidate, same diff); New York is a swing state due to Republicans upstate and Tammany in NYC.  The similarities are much more striking than the differences.

That, good sir, is ignoring everything that happened to change the Democratic party between Election Day 1892 and Election Day 1896. There's a reason Cleveland was able to take states like New York and Connecticut, even biting into the Mid-West with Illinois and Indiana, yet got utterly screwed out West. At the same time, there's a reason Bryan got absolutely destroyed in New England, failed to capture any of the Northern industrial states, and did better than any Democrat in the West since the 1850's. There is a reason that over the course of the next couple of years, Democrats actually could regularly take states like Nebraska (when they could take any states at all), when as late as 1892 they had been unable to carry it even once.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,310
United States


« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2013, 11:56:19 AM »

That, good sir, is ignoring everything that happened to change the Democratic party between Election Day 1892 and Election Day 1896. There's a reason Cleveland was able to take states like New York and Connecticut, even biting into the Mid-West with Illinois and Indiana, yet got utterly screwed out West. At the same time, there's a reason Bryan got absolutely destroyed in New England, failed to capture any of the Northern industrial states, and did better than any Democrat in the West since the 1850's. There is a reason that over the course of the next couple of years, Democrats actually could regularly take states like Nebraska (when they could take any states at all), when as late as 1892 they had been unable to carry it even once.

Well, sure, the Dems had both Bourbon and populist factions, and obviously the coalitions they created were somewhat different.  But you still had populist Dems in 1892 and Bourbons in 1896, despite them not being at the helm of the party.

Let me put it to you this way: do you consider 1996 and 2008 part of the same party system?  I think they are, and the differences in the Democratic coalition both times is comparable.

When examining the Progressive Era and its surrounding years, we have the lens of history to look through. This is still 2013 bub.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 15 queries.