Election 1976, a case study. The hostess political analyst richard skin. With me here in washington today, im mr. Stephen has and the Brookings Institution and professor from georgetown university. This is the first of the series of programs that are going to extend over the full period of the campaign until beyond the election in november and i centennial political bureau. What we want to do is to bring a picture of the american electoral process. We will have special programs dealing with the parties and the media, the Campaign Techniques and polling and the rest. But what we are really aiming to do, this to give you a picture of the way in which we select our american president and how to hundred and 15 or 220 billion americans can provide every four years a process where which leadership can be developed and transferred over these 200 years of american history. What we hope to do is to bring you discussions of these various aspects of the electoral campaign, and begin that discussion with a consideration of historical overview of just the way in which this is worked in the past the critical elections the major elections the watershed elections if you will, in the american electoral process. How these have developed, how they have responded to american political demands, both foreign and domestic. How have they replied to the needs and demands of the electorate . And when we have this historical overview we will consider how this has met these demands and needs and how it may be projected forward to meet the demands and the needs of our bicentennial president ial year. National conventions are a political process uniquely american. Each Political Party needs to write its platform and to choose the candidate that will represent it in the national elections. It happens every four years and it is happening again in 1976. It all began in 1831, when the First NationalParty Conventions were held to elect president ial candidates. Since 1856, the republican and democratic parties have dominated american politics. Abraham lincoln in 1860 was the first republican elected to the presidency. Each candidate is remembered for his own particular campaign style. William Jennings Brian for his fullness of freezes and flamboyant gestures. Teddy roosevelt for his vigorous, direct and no nonsense manner. applause in 1924 when radio invented the Convention Hall on the can campaign trail, john w. Davis was the democratic candidate. The record 103 ballots required to nominate him for president left the party divided. In the end his republican opponent Calvin Coolidge won the election easily. Today, the president coolidge is remembered more for his cool manner and frequent fishing trips. In 1928, alfred east smith was one of the most colorful and controversial candidates ever to hold a number one position on a party ticket. I am a happy warrior. Alfred east smith. Yet, at election time, the iowa smile and the pleasant voice of Herbert Hoover one of the white house for his party for four more years. In 1932, republican luck ran out for the next 20 years, when candidates like window wilkie proved to be no match for the brilliant democratic president franklin delay no roosevelt. Over the years, republicans and democrats alike have run their conventions and basically the same manner. The chairman is chosen, delegates are certified, a Party Platform is adopted and candidates for the presidency are nominated. I give you the man, the next democratic nominee, our next in the 1952 and 56 campaign, the impeccable style of the democratic candidate adelaides steven stun provided an interesting contrast to the more personal style of general eisenhower. Eisenhower rested in the warm father image that he projected into millions of americans homes. When the demonstrations for each candidate or completed, the roll call vote follows, sometimes decisive and other times a formality. In recent years, most candidates have received the necessary majority in the first ballot. For example, john f. Kennedy in 1960. Mister chairman, will make majority for senator kennedy. applause finally, there are the acceptance speeches in 1936, franklin the roosevelt. I accept i join with you franklin de roosevelt in 1940, a strong third and fourth Party Movement significantly affected the outcome of the elections. With thomas eat do we, the heavily favored republican candidate competing with thurman, the chief spokesman for the conservative states right party and Henry Wallace the choice of the small but enthusiastic liberal progressive party, harry truman on the democratic ticket walked away from the election as the victor. This was one of the greatest electoral upsets in american history. applause National Conventions are then a political process that is uniquely american. Face has changed but there are always the crowds, the speeches, music and suspense. After the candidates are chosen and the campaign has ended, the people speak. Through the ballot box determine who will assume the burden and power of the american presidency. Steve, and looking at a film like this, i suppose there are some who would say well, this is all just tweeted dumb and tweet will be and really is not that important. Elections do not really decide anything. What do you think . That passing parade of all those historical faces certainly suggests to me a personal response on one level of that question after all an election by definition is a choice between two individuals so when you ask yourself does it make any difference between George Mcgovern and Richard Nixon in 1972 . Would it have made any difference if American People had chosen adelaide stevenson instead of eisenhower. In 1952 or Herbert Hoover instead of roosevelt and 1932. I think of course it would. They were very different people. And the important part of our system is with a fixed term, were electing people for the future for the next four years and with one exception they were sold for four years. We dont know whats going to happen in the four years. We do not ask candidates hypothetical questions. What would you do if the east germans build a wall across berlin . What would you do if the soviets placed offensive missiles and cuba . So we put these individuals in a longruling process in which we had hope just by the constant pressures on them and exposure to them that were going to find out some things that will be useful to us, to making this choice. Dramatic examples would be suddenly in 1952, it was discovered that the republican Vice President ial candidate has it a secret fund to pay as a personal expense. There is suddenly the president ial candidate eisenhower in this case, how to make a decision. We watched him make a decision. 1972 in the situation with, the Vice President ial candidate of the democratic. Came up on a series of mental illness. We watched the president ial candidate make a decision. That was important to us and trying to judge how that person we were giving this leadership to from four to six years is going to respond. From that personal level it definitely makes a difference. Same question to you. Stevens response to it. What do you think . Let me begin by quoting david butler, American British european politics who once said that it was more important in terms of domestic and Foreign Policy of the united states, who was president , that it is to the british people, who happens to be or which party happens to be elected. The presidency is so important and office in the united states. The role that he plays and both domestic and Foreign Policy, leading of the people, it becomes an item of tremendous important. It becomes more dramatic when you get in the age of crisis. Everyone, northerners, southerners something was very important about the 1860 election. The moment the election took place it began to get a revolt and the south. Because of the crisis that existed. Everybody knew that there was a crisis, and the way it came out was the way in which the republican was going to go. Sometimes we have a place of peace and quiet and calm, and in those cases the elections dont appear to be that exciting, and it may not make that much difference, i think it is certainly true if you look at the historical prospect of american elections. 1860 is very clear that lincoln elected under those within 50 years. But certainly americans at that time and again in 96 when brian was the candidate on the points of silver, these produced a 96 it produced almost two generations of republican in toll. In that sense, it is very important. I suppose, listening to the language of the election and the election of 76 as well. People may have a different view. What about the issue, steve, now we talked about the candidates and historical perspective. What about the issues and went in part they may have from a historical overview . This is where we most often hear that question of tweetedy and twiddle dumb. Does it make it they dont appear by the standards of some countries to be very different. They are different. The each present a platform. The candidates each make a long series of speeches with our commitments to the American People. History shows that by and large they try to honor those commitments and they try to and act when an office the pledges that their party makes they cannot always do it. It by and large, a politician would prefer to honor his commitment than not to honor his commitments, although they are not as sharp interpreter i am sure we look at the way in which, not the platform but the individual announcements of the candidates. You take the kinds of issue we are going to get this year as we had in the past. With this man says or woman says if we have a woman candidate, it counts. But you see overseas, and you can make this comparison like australia britain and france and the rest. What would you think was the difference here between the kind of historic commitment that weve had . It seems to me if we come up again then you are going to get as clear and sharp a distinction between american parties as you do between the parties and other countries. Or american candidates. If one goes by to the 1932 or 36 period. In 1932, there was a commitment from both candidates to solve the problem of unemployment repression. You had happened between 1932 and 36 was the development of the vast foe program which was very different from what had been the previous programs. Here, you then had a 36 sharp issue, going out not so much out of speeches of 1932 as going out of the impact of a president in this case, franklin visibility, on the economy, the politics, the whole social life of the country. This was the issue in 1936 and a very sharp one. Sharper than that it would be now in 76 . Yes, i do think so. Again, you were witness to the crisis. We were obviously in the crisis. What about the fringes we here for 76 as we have in earlier campaigns on abortion, gun control, School Busing prayers a whole host of things. Above and beyond whatever you want to say about it, the economic circumstances, what role would they play and played in the past . Because we are such a large country and so diversified, so many different groups and interests, candidates are forced to speak to this whole menu of issues. Ironically, it does not make for the most useful democratic process. In that, ethereal would be much better to have a campaign focused on half a dozen most important issues. Nevertheless, candidates are forced to make commitments because they try to appeal so broadly across the board. I tend to think in a rare exceptions, that they are fringe issues by and large, elections are decided on bread and butter issues, Economic Issues and the major issue of war and peace. These others are sideshows. Very interesting, useful in the whole development of the laundry list of legislation, for the next congress and so forth, but in terms of the actual outcome of the election i tend to think, how good do you feel that you have it . A job, do you think your futures bright . Are we at war or at peace . Do we have to fight or not . Let me shift if i may, to another thing we saw in looking at this film. The technique. You saw these exciting scenes from the convention you saw Teddy Roosevelt making a speech from the end of the train. It was mr. Coolidge fishing out there. Looking for fish. You see any major changes and 76 looking back at this panoply of history. Do you see any major changes for 76 and Campaign Techniques and methods . Much of it will be the same. There is a real effort of a candidate, to almost any democratic society, to make some kind of contact with the people at the human level. This is in part where they were trying to do. And the convention is going to be a rallying ground of partisans on both sides, in addition to actually nominating the candidate. On the other hand, it seems to me that there has been some changes, some of the changes are the result of changes in the whole society, where there is a greater dependence on the media. More than would have been 50 years ago. It was simply unavailable. There will be less of the kinds of parades and that sort of thing which dominated it 100 years ago. What im saying is, it has to change as the society and as the communication instruments change. I think that to some extent that because of the candidates moving around the country, because they are seen by everyone on television and heard on the radio, they are forced to debate issues more clearly. State issues more clearly. Debating with others to a greater extent than they were forced to do prior to the coming of television or to the coming of radio. Let me take up the first point. I think it is terribly interesting. It tends to get overlooked. It is about the continuity that we get, know that we have the technology, he can leave the studio and appeal to 200 Million People just by sitting in his chair. They dont. They still go through the same rituals. Rituals change to a degree to reflect the change and technology. When you had radio, candidates started to use radio. Television, they started to television. But what strikes me is the amazing similarities overtime. Rather than the differences which are differences and technique and in response to new technical changes. Someone once said that if a doctor came back from say 1912 to 1976, he has to learn all the new techniques. If the doctor if a lawyer came back he would have to learn all the new cases. But a politician would be able to fit and much quicker because he would simply say well, television, youve got the theater. You can just do it in advance, cant you . Youve got amplification of human voice. You do not have to get somebody with a bull voice of his own to project to the last rover the balcony. You could do it almost any when you want. I am intrigued that both of you agree that the mechanical changes, the technological changes, while they do of course affect the way in which you carry on a campaign are not so finally, just major. Quickly, what about money . Is that going to be vastly different this year . It is going to be quite different this year. Indeed, one of the reasons some of our candidates may stay in a little longer than is the case when they are seeking at the nominations. There is some government assurance that if they pick up a minimum amount of money that they can also get assistance from the federal government to help finance them. Whether it will also be true that you to the rules, that it must be in small quantities which may eliminate some people who get a wealthy backer. People like staff and and others. I do not know. I do not think it is the wealthy backer that ordinarily puts forth the man who ultimately becomes president. In general, once we became the president had a broad base of support within their own party and often among independents as well from whom they can get money. As you know, they used to say you need a good candidate, a good issue, good organization, good money and good luck. I suppose the other four are just as important as the money. While the money counts for a good deal and if i were a candidate i rather have it did not have it, it is not the thing which in the final analysis is going to control. You have a good candidate and a good organization, whether it is 1830 or 1930 or 1976, that candidate is probably going to be able to gather together the kind of things that he actually needs to achieve the presidency. There are two republican hopefuls in 1976 and many more on the democratic side. Here are some of those seeking the presidency in this 1976 bicentennial president ial election. Among the declared candidates for this the 48 president ial election is incumbent gerald are ford. Hes seeking an elected term so he can continue the programs and policies of his first 20 months in office after succeeding to nixon. Ronald reagan, former governor of california and before that the film star. Reagan is attempting to gain the republican partys nomination for president. His platform contends that the federal government has become too large and powerful. Among the Democratic Party candidates are jimmy carter. He started as a peanut farmer internal politician. He is waging a campaign of personal contact that has lifted him from obscurity to National Attention. Fred harris, a former u. S. Senator from oklahoma and earlier and Oklahoma State senator is running a vigorous all volunteer campaign as a populist candidate with the strong youth backing. Sergeant shriver who helped create and later directed the peace corps under president john f. Kennedy, served as u. S. Ambassador to france during the johnson administration. He was the democratic Vice President ial nominee in 1972. Senator birch by of indiana. Hes a dynamic young member of the u. S. Senate. He has enjoyed labor Union Support and achieved National Attention as chairman of the Senate Constitutional amendments committee. Minutes providing for 18 year old vote and president ial succession. Senator jackson of washington has taken a strong position over 34 years of congress. He is considered liberal but a leading spokesman for military preparedness. The congressman from arizona for the past 16 years has been called lincolnesque because of his height and whole spun campaign image. He is working hard to gain National Attention as a liberal in his bid for the president ial nomination. Governor george walsh of alabama, one of the most colorful candidates, is known for his strong stand on the rights of the states. He campaigned in 1972 as a independent after losing his bid for the democratic president ial nomination. A crippling assassination attempt in 1972 has not kept him from holding a full schedule both as a candidate and governor. How do the candidates get there . In other countries there is usually a very carefully devised screening method by which the leadership comes up from the rank and file. Its a good deal more open and chaotic i suppose in the united states. Howard tell us, how do i become a candidate for president if i want to be one . If you want to be one and have the nerve in the energy, you simply declare yourself a candidate. If you need a few signatures to get on a ballot, you get those and theres no problem getting on the ballot in any state for any of the primaries where they are held. The kinds of people who have the six for you desire, interest and nerve, take buck you a look at the kinds of people who are coming in this time. We have three x governors who have been talking about it and participating. They are not absolutely unemployed as former governors but they are not in politics at the moment. They are not holding any public office. You have a few of ex senators who it are seeking the democratic nomination and one running as an independent. Your members hold members of congress holding office. You have a former Vice President. You have a woman who was interested in preventing abortions. They have all decided that they want to be president of the united states. They are campaigning and will participate in the elections. It is probably than any place else. You are free to become one of the candidates if you want to. Theres virtually nothing that bars you. You do not have to have the endorsement of anyone in your party. Its useful to have it sometimes but you do not need it. Its just free and open is all. There are certain qualifications by law. The constitution says you need to be 35 years of age and a natural born citizen. There are certain traditions that have broken down over the years because we are basically a white anglosaxon country. That tends to be the type of person who runs. But 1960 where we never had a catholic president before, we had our first catholic president. There is talk there was talk in 1972 of a jew running for Vice President. 1976 there was talk of a black running for Vice President. Women candidates come along frequently. What was once were disabling qualities and qualifications of people have gradually been eliminated. Would you agree that its basically a matter of self to iteration. What about self identifying to certain values. Its akin to the game of Musical Chairs were candidates walk around the chairs and when the music stops they have two signature. If you think of each chair as having an ideological label from left to the right, each candidate tries to sit in one. Since we are basically a centrist country, the best chairs are in the middle. We start taking away chairs each time the music starts from the ends. A classic example of this was in 1952 when the democratic nomination fight. One candidate was not known as a liberal set in the conservative chair. What we see right now its 1976 are the candidates moving around the chairs trying to position themselves for when the music stops to be able to sit in a good chair. One does not want to suggest that one changes philosophy as they go by the chair. Because some of the people who have a fairly firm base of support and one ideological category or another. The french people steve are talking about who are infrequent. I must say because there are so many candidates as opposed to other systems, they somehow have to differentiate themselves from their opponents and opposition. Make this clear to the public. In this way they are trying to position themselves being either conservative or either less conservative. You must always have this problem for the candidates. They take one position to win is partys nomination. But the center of his party is not necessarily the center of his republic. So he takes another position later. It does not change his views he just lets the light of truth shine on a different political belief. I want to thank you for being with us in washington this afternoon. Mister steven has and professor howard pena man. This is richard scam in washington. Next jimmy who . If im created for 1976 candidate jimmy carter. It was used to introduce the former georgia governor to voters during the primary season and updated as the race progressed. This version chronicles the campaign through his nomination at the Democratic National convention in july. Jimmy carter went on to defeat general ford gerald ford. This 15 minute film is courtesy of the jimmy carter president ial library and museum. In december of 1974, there was a major headline that said jimmy carter is running for what