The First ‘Modern’ Campaign
1896 Presidential Election Campaign of William McKinley
Tip: Before you proceed, I suggest you read the story behind starting this blog.
In this article, I study the 1896 Presidential election campaign of William McKinley, the 25th President of the United States. Remarked to be the first ‘modern’ campaign in history, McKinley and his campaign manager Mark Hanna devised a systematic and organised endeavour to secure the White House. I provide an understanding of the campaign through its key messages, tactics and tone.
Background
William McKinley had served in the Union Army during the American Civil War and practised as a lawyer in Canton, Ohio, prior to entering politics. Elected to Congress in 1877, McKinley was an avowed protectionist, and authored the Tariff Act of 1890, referred to as the ‘McKinley Tariff.’ He lost his seat in 1891 as a result of gerrymandering but was soon elected Governor in 1892.
Mark Hanna was a Cleveland businessman, Republican powerbroker and a friend of McKinley. McKinley and Hanna began to organise a systematic nationwide effort to seek the support of Republican delegates, attempting to secure the presidential nomination. They campaigned under the slogan “The People Against the Bosses” emphasising McKinley’s decision to not broker deals with the era’s political bosses such as Pennsylvania Senator Matthew Quay and New York’s Thomas C. Platt, and seek the nomination without strings attached. Former presidential political adviser Karl Rove remarked this as “the first modern presidential primary campaign.”
Their efforts bore fruit in June 1896 at the 1896 Republican National Convention in St. Louis, Missouri. McKinley was nominated as the Republican presidential candidate, and Hanna was elected as the chairman of the RNC. Hanna’s team comprised of former Congressman Clay Evans, McKinley’s cousin William McKinley Osborne, then NYPD commissioner Frederick D. Grant, Matthew Quay, and future vice-president and Nobel awardee Charles G. Dawes.
The Democratic National Convention was held during the following month in Chicago. McKinley and Hanna predicted their opponent would be former Missouri representative Richard P. Bland, the frontrunner. Dawes, having known William Jennings Bryan—a young, pro-silver, former Nebraska representative in nomination race—disagreed; opining that if he got the opportunity to showcase his oratory skills at the Convention, he would sweep the nomination. Dawes proved to be right; William Jennings Bryan shook the Convention with his messianic “Cross of Gold” speech and was nominated to be McKinley’s rival.
Key Messages
McKinley fought the campaign on big issues, which were:
a. Support for protectionism
b. Opposition to bimetallism or “Free Silver”
c. Call for unity and reconciliation.
William McKinley strongly held that the principal message of his campaign would be his favoured policy of strong support for protectionism. The campaign argued that America had gained prosperity when strong protectionist measures were in place, and would regain prosperity upon reimposing protectionism. The campaign preached the benefits of protection on American workers of once-protected sectors — such as labourers, miners, steelworkers and farmers, effectively tapping into the protectionist bias of majoritarian democracies. In addition, the issue had consensus amongst Republicans. McKinley’s protectionist stance gained him support from notable businessmen of the time, including J. P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller, who generously contributed to the campaign. The stance, however, comes under suspicion as it could have resulted through Hanna’s insistence, often the case with protectionist stances.
McKinley actively downplayed the issue of bimetallism, preferring to concentrate on protection; to the disagreement of some Republicans. When he said, “This money matter is unduly prominent. In thirty days you won’t hear anything about it,” his friend Judge William R. Day replied, “In my opinion, in thirty days you won’t hear of anything else.”
Bimetallism is a monetary standard where the currency is defined in terms of two metals (gold and silver) with a fixed ratio between them. Monometallism, on the other hand, defines currency in terms of one metal (gold), and hence, is commonly referred to as ‘gold standard.’
Apart from McKinley’s expertise on protectionism, McKinley attempted to distance the campaign from bimetallism as it divided the Republicans—several Western and Midwestern Republicans were in favour of the change. By mid-August, the campaign team realised that Judge Day had been right, that the principle issue of the election was indeed bimetallism. Hence, McKinley decided to keep aside protectionism, at least temporarily.
McKinley and Bryan were decisive and unambiguous with their stances on bimetallism. The McKinley campaign concentrated on the adverse economic consequences of bimetallism, particularly inflation. The campaign argued for the benefits of the gold standard to all key voting blocs — pro-gold businessmen and labourers, and pro-silver farmers. Bryan, who was more passionate and vocal about the issue, excluded large sections of the national audience due to his uncompromising stance on bimetallism, targeted towards pro-silver agrarian classes and people from western United States. McKinley’s wider appeal developed a larger voter base opposing bimetallism.
Despite the bimetallism issue being the most important, McKinley did not allow it to dominate his campaign. McKinley realised that Americans craved for someone who would replace the message of pessimism and division with optimism and unity.
The third key message of McKinley’s campaign was a call for unity and reconciliation, countering Bryan’s divisive messages that promoted animosity between regions and classes. McKinley drove the message of unity to various delegations, including Union and Confederate war veterans, Central and South European migrants, women, and labourers, from various regions of the United States. He emphasised that post-Civil War America was one country with a common destiny, and this destiny could only be achieved through the unity of all Americans. In one his speeches, McKinley quoting George Washington said, “There should be no North, no South, no East, no West — but a common country.” Portraying himself as a unifier, McKinley emphasised on optimism, national unity and reconciliation. The key message was immensely effective, increasing political involvement and broadening McKinley’s electoral support base. Through this message, McKinley linked the Republicans with unity and waged a campaign of memory, associating Bryan’s divisive tone and the Democrats with the latter’s secessionist stance during the Civil War.
Tactics
The 1896 McKinley presidential election campaign is regarded as “the first ‘modern’ campaign” because of the organised, systematic and exemplary use of campaign tactics by McKinley and Hanna.
The campaign carefully segmented and targeted the audience through their campaign tactics. They struck a chord with each target audience by detailing how McKinley’s stances on the issue benefitted them, which is highly effective in election campaigns.
The prime tactics of the McKinley campaign were:
a. Political advertising
b. the Front-porch campaign.
McKinley and Hanna ran a campaign of persuasion using political advertising. The campaign team prepared and distributed a tremendous amount of campaign pamphlets that educated citizens, and managed a horde of orators, some paid, to propagate the key messages on McKinley’s behalf.
Perry S. Heath, a 41-year old editor who was previously President Harrison’s public relations man, oversaw every piece of printed material distributed by the campaign. He also ran the news bureau, which prepared statements and regular printing plates containing articles and photos. William M. Hahn, the former boss of President Harrison’s speakers’ bureau, managed the orators for the campaign. Importance was given to speakers with expertise in labour and agricultural outreach, and speakers fluent in foreign languages.
Examples of targeted campaign material include: “Dear John”—a letter from a farmer to his brother describing the benefits of the gold standard for agriculture; “American Farmers Were Protected by the McKinley Tariff Law”; Heath’s appeal to miners depicting lower wages for them in bimetal countries. The campaign democratically enfranchised linguistic minorities like the Spanish, Hebrew and German communities, using multilingual advertising.
The front-porch campaign was the most effective tactic of the McKinley campaign. The tactic continued to be used in later campaigns — most notably in 1920 by (then) Republican presidential nominee Warren G. Harding and in 2004 by Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.
In contrast to Bryan, McKinley was not a stump speaker and required preparation before making a speech. McKinley was aware that he lacked Bryan’s pace and showmanship. Despite Hanna’s repeated requests, McKinley was firm on not attempting to imitate Bryan’s tactics.
After the Republican convention, groups of supporters, some invited, some expected and some unexpected, began to continuously pour at McKinley’s Canton home. Initially, they were hundreds of Republican women, Union war veterans, glassworkers and student Republicans. By July’s end, McKinley was convinced that it would be best to utilise the growing attendance, and campaign from his front porch, as opposed to a nationwide railroad campaign like that of his competitor.
The campaign team identified and invited segmented groups to McKinley’s front porch. These groups were composed of key voting blocs such as workers from various industries, farmers, German-Americans, and those from states critical to the election. McKinley would then research on the local issues and economics respective to the group. Utilising this research, McKinley prepared and delivered a tailored speech. As he knew what to say and when to say it, the targeted speeches were well-received. Joseph P. Smith would transcribe every speech, and distribute them to the audience and journalists. The speeches were reprinted in local newspapers in the delegation’s hometown.
Tone
The McKinley campaign utilised positive and negative tones to disseminate their key messages.
Initially, the campaign used a negative tone. McKinley constructed a dystopic image of the United States if trade protection was reduced and bimetallism was adopted. Later in the campaign, the tone switched to a positive one, emphasising on confidence in the United States, post-Civil War reconciliation and national unity.
The dual-tone of the campaign proved to be effective. The initial negative tone mobilised pro-protectionism and anti-bimetallism voting blocs, including pro-gold Democrats. Changing the tone later in the campaign, starkly different to the divisive and pessimistic tone of Bryan, crystallised support for McKinley.
Conclusion
The 1896 Presidential election returned a decisive victory for McKinley. The election was a ‘realigning election’, paving way for nearly four decades (1896–1932) of Republican dominance. Aptly called “the first ‘modern’ election campaign” by former presidential adviser Karl Rove, the McKinley campaign modernised the art of political campaigning.
This post is an edited version of a fully referenced academic essay written by the author.
In the next post, you will read about a phenomenal campaign spearhead by an Indian actor-turned-politician that led to the regional party founded by him sweeping the state election within a year of its founding.
