This is an automated transcription.

Mount Vernon cannot guarantee the accuracy or quality of the transcription. If you
would like to provide a better transcription you can submit one at:
http://www.mountvernon.org/video/send-us-your-transcription/

ok
and I was this is
to move there
I'm gonna have to
it was realized so I started to
do something before that was
really that was really bad or
had it still had opened have
removed the thumb drive
yep all right
ok
yeah
ok
yeah
this
yeah
yes
I was sittin sorry
yeah
all right good to see everybody
today let's get this thing going
for those of you who don't know
I am Doug Bradburn
welcome to Mount Vernon welcome
to the front w smith national
library for the study of George
Washington which is where we are
on the founding director and
this is our Ford evening book
talks you know the ford motor
company has been a great
supporter of Mount Vernon since
Henry for donated the first fire
engine to the estate we want to
make sure that the mansion
doesn't burn down and that's
been a long time a concern of
ours and an ongoing issue but
we're really thankful to Ford
the Ford family and the ford
motor company for their
continuing support for all of
our projects mount vernon of
course doesn't take any
government money it's all
supported by private funds so we
depend upon people
patriotic citizens around the
world to support the mission of
educating people about George
Washington's life and legacy
it's great to see everybody out
here tonight and it's great to
welcome c span as well and
c-span's audience to this
wonderful evening lecture so
welcome guys this is going to be
a great evening
this is our evening book talks
in this is a December as you all
know the end of the year this is
the end of our first year of
evening book talks which we
kicked off in january of last
year and for some of you may
have been here at that time
we've really had a diverse group
of scholars and talks and we
began in january of last year
with a book called where the
trick cherry tree grew and it
was about George Washington at
ferry farm in fredericksburg
about Washington his boyhood and
in fact the way people remember
that boy would over time and
it's somewhat fitting then that
were ending the year tonight
looking at a sequence of events
that are really a partly about
George Washington's last great
public moment when he's leaving
the presidency so we kind of had
in that 12 months we've gone
from his boyhood to his
retirement essential
and so it's a nice symmetry that
we like to see now we have a
excellent speaker tonight who
i'm going to tell you a little
bit about Jeffrey L Paisley up
pasley this is an old ticket
known Jeff for a while and an
old tick I've had
now those of you here here we're
here last month we had denver
bronze - if you all remember was
the valedictorian of st. Olaf's
college well in this case we
have Jeffrey L pasley who was
not the valedictorian of
Carleton College the great enemy
of st. Olaf so this is nice and
denver of course that's right
that's right he did graduate
that's good it's a no he
graduated he did well because he
went on to do his master's and
PhD in history from Harvard
University in fact he worked
with the great historian Bernard
Bailyn really is one of the
Giants of early American history
and established many of the
baits in the field so the
tremendous lineage as we would
say but he you know Jeffrey has
moved well beyond the shadow of
a bail and he's now of course a
full professor at the University
of Missouri at Columbia three
trains graduate students and
undergraduate students
he's researches in American
political history is written a
number of different things he's
won a number of different
fellowships and awards including
the National Endowment for
Humanities younger scholars
fellowship the master fellowship
in arts and sciences the artemus
ward fellowship the history
division book prize as well as
other things is earlier books
he's got edited volumes as well
as books and other major book
the tyranny of printers is all
about the rule journalists in
creating the early politics of
America
he has an edited collection
that's of some significance i'll
let him talk to you about that
he wishes and this book tonight
the first presidential contest
the election of 1796 and the
beginnings of American democracy
was one of the finalists for the
George Washington book prizes as
we know which is a tremendous
achievement
in and of itself so will all of
you please give a nice warm
welcome to Jeffrey pasley okay
let me make sure I've got all
the this is by far the most
elaborate system I've ever stood
behind or in front of and I want
you all to know that this is my
this is a powerpoint just like
the ones i do for class as in
not designed for this up so
don't expect whirling multiple
images it's not the National
Constitution Center it's just me
and I'm also not at all sure
what the resolution of some of
these images is going to be
I hope it's good so for for all
things so for all of you and
just apologies to all of you and
for the viewers at home sorry i
hope this
reasonably well in case y'all
didn't know c-span they kind of
tell you they don't you don't
know like weeks in advance when
c-span's coming it's just like
so I found this out like last
night
so so I slightly nervous about
that and I don't know this is
really national TV ready but
let's give it a try
I was interested of course that
Doug couldn't speak the name of
my edited book here in this
place because it's called beyond
the founders where we talk about
where we actually talked about
political history what political
is true be like but not without
the founders really but just
beyond them with other things
alongside it and in fact this
current book is actually a sort
of return to the founders so I
guess I've I guess it's not
exactly a come-to-jesus moment
but i guess it's close any rate
most Americans are are proud to
be Americans
but not the of their political
system where the government that
runs i'm speaking of the present
day
Congress's reputation is at an
all-time low for instance and
just keeps finding lower really
the two-party system is so
unpopular that one-third of
Americans disclaim any part of
it and considerably more
practice that dude I just not
participating the founders on
the other hand continued to ride
high in our esteem it seems to
be the great dream of every
Washington journalists to
publish a book about them and
cop some of their popularity and
gravitas and even crusty portly
old John Adams got to be a TV
star
once upon a time that's this is
actually illustration that so I
i actually wrote a column
complaining about John Adams
mania as it existed back in the
the time when a David McCullough
this book was a best-seller and
the HBO series on this is like a
sort of cheek illustration that
somebody made for me to
illustrate what I was saying
so I've been thought it fit for
this because the founders are so
popular that even John Adams got
to be popular he was never
popular in life right now
he was never popular than
anything in life even when you
want
so Americans still look up to
the founders gala regularly
Paul's in the question of how
the founders which feel that I
had the United States has turned
out I turned out and as of 2013
71 percent said their world
their early American heroes
would be disappointed
I'm not here to support did i'm
not here to dispute American
Americans love the founders
I mean that would be rather
childish to come at Martin and
talk about how people should
know that a lot of the founders
in fact it might be illegal
I'm not sure foremost for the
most part they were mad
admirable accomplishment of
uncommon courage committed to
what we're in their day fresh
and highly progressive ideas
though in their day obviously as
big as a big a big proviso the
mired in a social economic
system predicated on perpetual
enslavement of one group of
people in the expropriation of
another undoubtedly the founders
compare favorably to most of the
people we watch on cable news
every night those of you who
could stand to do that and I
don't actually include myself in
that in that number
the founder started government's
rather than shutting them down
and I think we do our ear and
there's a disservice and cloud
our vision if we put them up too
far in the clouds in here
I need to get this point in the
right direction and make sure I
ok there we go
I don't know what's going to
happen if
interesting well anyway so the
apathy osis of Washington
just as an example of that just
just just to say that the
putting putting the founders up
in the clouds is not me that's
not me hyperpolarizing that's
something that's the the roof of
the US Capitol and number of
other pin and a common thing
even at the even at the time for
that the rotunda of the US
Capitol
that's actually course the one
on the the one on the right up
there which course of you can't
see unless you have telescopic
vision or you're spying but when
you get close up that's what it
looks like i'm told
politics was always politics and
many things we decry about the
decline of American politics are
actually things that were
present from the beginning or
before the beginning and if
there's any like sort of one
message to my work I think it's
that other aspects of our
political system like political
parties the founders thought
they could do without
but turned out to be very very
wrong my book tries to explain
what happened in the first
contested president like
presidential election while also
showing some light on what
hasn't has not into not changed
in twenty two hundred twenty
years of American politics now
we'll say a word about myself is
that
and i don't mean about myself my
approach i would venture to say
and this is not something I
disagree with us
I disagree with it all that most
professional historians tend to
emphasize the idea that the past
is a foreign country far removed
from us and I guess I don't
necessarily disagree with that
but especially when dealing with
the founders I think it's useful
sometimes just sometimes retreat
American the American politics
of the past as something that
didn't happen in a foreign
country but happened in our
country as in the one that we
still live in find the
connections that go across time
and see in and try to include it
all in the same mental space
that way we can hold the
founders above ourselves only in
the cases where that is actually
worked
which may be a lot of cases ok
so there's America that's a
that's the sort of a
contemporary map of America as
in from the time about what the
United States how far the United
States went in the 79th ease and
that's the sort of one that's
actually from the time he was a
later one that still is sort of
crude which shows the same shows
the same places if you can see
that's one that's actually
trying to show population not
just we're not just where the
United States is but as you can
see it doesn't go very far
one thing about American
politics of this change very
little and makes a good place to
begin is geography
now of course there were a lot
fewer state since 1796 national
Tennessee was about as far west
as you could have found a voter
get the basic structure of the
electrical map was electoral map
was more or less the same as it
would be in Barack Obama's to
presidential elections as it was
when John Adams was elected and
so I'm getting the hang of this
ok so that's this joint and
that's that 1796
and I i've got i've actually in
a separate and avoid having to
look as much if I catch up to
this one I've got a separate one
up here so i have to look back
don't have to look to the left
so that's you see the states
only go so far but you see the
basic structure is the same New
England on the one side the
lower south on the other those
are the two extremes with the
states in between making the
decision and basically it boils
down until Ohio came along in
ohio be added to this and then
of course in the end
missouri where I'm from Missouri
exists gets added to this but in
the old days
it's pretty much as think you it
was on one side the lower south
on the other and it was pretty
much a decision between New York
Pennsylvania New Jersey
you got two of those three one
if you lost two and three
you lost and of course obviously
three of three ways been better
you see that Jefferson carries
Pennsylvania of atoms gets new
york in new jersey and so Adams
is the winner
but so you go to 2008 and
obviously i should have shy
should've what whoops i did it
on me but I didn't mind not your
see this is what's gonna happen
so there's two thousand eight
and if you have to just kind of
avert your eyes to the left of
the screen and veer to the right
of the screen to kind of see the
see this is some of the same
thing where you've got a again
the Lower South especially the
two look 4a South Carolina in
Massachusetts especially or
South Carolina Connecticut south
carolina in Connecticut never
inhabit the same the same space
whereas is the states in between
go back and are the other ones
or ones at the side and just
quickly
you see that it's more or less
came out the same in 2012
you can make it to Paris and
even more detail than that
Pennsylvania is the classic
swing swing state but in night
1796 the real decider or one of
the real deciders was the area
we're in right now
Northern Virginia that was
always a place somewhat apart
from the rest of the state
even before the growth of the DC
suburbs that if I had a more
detailed county level map you
can see help push Virginia to
Obama in 2008 2012 and made
Virginia into a kind of swing
state for the first time in 17
1996 obviously Northern Virginia
was not yet the DC suburbs but
it was just a somewhat less
remote and more commercialized
Virginia plantation district
where some of the more ambitious
landowners were
developing towns and kept towns
and canals and looking forward
to trading property from trade
routes between the interior of
the continent and the eastern
seaboard course this is kind of
all predicated on the idea that
the Potomac was going to be the
great highway to the highway to
the interior which did not pan
out but they thought it was they
thought it was going to pan out
they kind of got the capital
instead with most of the state
going heavily for Jefferson one
was seized me by one more map
that I forgot to divert i forgot
to do which just shows you what
happens in 1800 illustration of
what i was talking about that
when Pennsylvania goes to New
York goes to Jefferson 1800 and
then it's cleaned up
with most a-goin heavily for
Jefferson one of these
landowners Carl Levin Powell
pictured here military contract
tractor
there's another Northern
Virginia theme I was quite
amused to find that this is a
northern virginia lecture in
1796 was it was a military
contractors like interesting
with most of this is also a
flower manufacturer in the
founder of middleburg Virginia
he ran for a lector as a critic
of jefferson and shaved off one
crucial Virginia electoral vote
for John Adams of Massachusetts
that was one-third of atoms
eventual margin of victory came
from Northern Virginia and you
can see on the previous map of
the state legislature prevented
such an outcome and 1800 by
switching to the now-familiar
winner-take-all system of some
of the sign their electoral
votes so Virginia Virginia was
that was on a district system in
1796 so 11 Powell Colonel Powell
is able to shave off one vote
that became one of the three
that puts Adams over the top but
later the matching hundred goes
to winner take all and that's
that's no longer possible it's
the state majority you guys turn
off the sound of the powerpoint
that's kind of an accident just
anybody's in the booth there
mute that would be good because
if there's any sounds in there
it's accidental
this is what I'm talking about
about how this is actually class
power points that have suddenly
appeared here which occasionally
have a little wake up the
students noises which would not
be
on c-span
you can just imagine you know
interstitial music appropriate
interstitial music I guess if
any little noise is going course
the story of this one electors
crucial role suggest a major
difference between then and now
electors actually did something
in 1796 the Constitution has
written both give them a
completely free hand in making
the president so special
selection and provides no
instructions other than each
state needed to . electors who
would gather in vote each state
on the appointed day since
either Jefferson or Adams nor
pals first choice patrick henry
was on any ballot
Colonel Powell had to go to the
trouble of publishing a notice
in the newspapers explaining to
the world and the voters that he
would vote against Thomas
Jefferson they've elected and he
did this most elaborately but
this is something that a lot of
electors in 1796 had to go do
the nature of pals complained
about Jefferson will be four
more familiar however given the
frequency which has been used
against self consciously or
perceivably liberal presidential
candidates ever since
drawing on his own experiences
an officer during the
Revolutionary War palette use
Jefferson whose advocates tired
him is the candidate of
enlightenment inequality as a
weakling a coward who is quote
want to firmness in general and
confidence had left Virginia be
overrun by the British when he
was governor Jimmy governor in
1781 face with a british army
with paul wrote jefferson and
quote dwindled into the poor
timid philosopher in another
road cut and run
that's another one that made me
I drop out of my chair they
actually said that
and that's actually in a
newspaper from 1796 is the
Jefferson would cut and run a
baby in his cradle set another
writer could not have been more
helpless than Jefferson faced
with real men
Miller Beal military men
president Jefferson would surely
leave the nation just as exposed
as governor Jefferson had left
his state as Powell intended
Adam supporters around the
country made that item go viral
jumping from newspaper to
newspaper around the country
reprinted or repeated until it
was common knowledge
Powell became 11 pal became the
toast of conservative
Federalists for the rest of his
life quote wherever I went I was
known as the person who voted
singly for Adams and put him in
office now almost nothing in 11
Powell story shows the
presidential election system
going as the framers of the
Constitution plant
nothing goes as a plan parties
are competing for the Fred were
competing for the presidency
presidential electors were
reaching out to the voters at
large and campaigning for
national candidates
this was not what was planned
the founders of the founders
hated political parties quote
the last degradation of a free
moral agent Jefferson called
parties in boston they raise a
glass to the toast made the cake
I'm going to take a drink made
the cankerworm of faction never
ascend the stem nor blast the
fruit of the tree of liberty
so water because they were done
that with rum and they had that
there they have the banquets
with a toe school like 15 long
plus volunteers so they can hold
their liquor
the founders knew of no previous
nation where two groups at
battle for power of the national
government without one try to
overthrow the other usually with
violence by revolution or by one
side inviting foreign power and
settle the matter in the 1790s
the founders could read about
such occurrences current events
in france in Poland where it
happened several times in this
period including of the end of
the revolution that port ideas
cusco led at one point before I
ended up in America came back to
America and within living memory
1745
great britain's opposition party
had conspired for what we now
think of as Great Britain
great britain's off opposition
party had proved itself not a
loyal opposition at all
conspiring with France and
Scottish rebels to put the old
stewart mom
keep back on the throne and that
happened when George Washington
was a teenager
so they had two examples they
had no examples of parties
working out they had many
examples of competing for
national power of causing the
end you know cause it being a
dreadful dreadful outcome
John Adams tried nothing so much
support as a division of the
Republican 22 great parties
each arranged under its leader
and concerning measures in
opposition to each other
the framers not only left
political parties out framers of
the Constitution not only left
political parties out of the
document but set up the
Electoral College partly to
prevent parties from forming the
idea was that by having a little
independent electors voting on
the same day but scattered in
their individual states the
framers hope to keep both the
both keep the presidential
election away from the passions
of the people and also to make
it impossible for any parties or
interests you might try to
influence the outcome to
coordinate their actions on a
national scale they were
counting on the fact that
communication and travel over so
large republic which was large
to them when you only had boats
and horses as the motive power
was very difficult slow and
expensive
now we'll say the Electoral
College the Constitution as many
great things in it
the electoral college never
worked once right I mean it work
to get it out why it worked but
it was unanimous
it never fade never worked once
under any sort of stress
whatsoever the way it was
intended acclamation for George
Washington was the one time it
went smoothly and even then
they're actually problems
what the founders did not count
on was the bitter differences
that immediately grew up among
them almost a moment their new
constitutional government was in
place not just personal
rivalries but fundamental policy
choices arose over what kind of
Republic the new nation would
become who would benefit and
what its place in the world was
to be people complain that
politics is too polarized today
with Democrats and Republicans
on every ballot and liberals and
conservatives on every talk show
panel but if you want to know
where polarization started even
where the hostility between left
and right in American politics
began i would argue
look no farther
the founders the people they
tried to rule over in the comp
complicated world in which they
all tried to live
polarization other words is us
and it's always been with thomas
jefferson Alexander Hamilton
installed as the two main
pillars
washington administration
there we go
you people not Hamilton has
appeared so Jefferson
I hope I don't I'm sure I don't
need to label these guys for
y'all stopped because i was so I
didn't
Jefferson on the Left Hamilton
on the right with these two guys
and pale does impaled fifth
installed as the two main
pillars of george washington
administration the founders
first quarrel that the founders
first quarrel over had him
Hamilton's plan to refinance the
bankrupt republic by putting its
money into the hands of Wall
Street in Chestnut Street in
Philadelphia which is where the
country's original financial
center was and I don't think I'm
being I don't think I'm not
trying to be a partisan by
saying that that's that was more
or less literally what what what
he was trying to do the bank
united states create as part of
Hamilton's program was a
privately controlled institution
that received the privilege the
bats privilege of holding the
government's revenues in its
faults and then being able to
make loans on that amount of
course a multiple of that amount
this generated a huge windfall
profit for investors in the US
public debt in a massive
potential capital for new
business ventures a good thing
by Hamilton's lights mean that
that's the way this was trying
to do this though it seemed
unfair to the even if it was
unfair to those without the
resources or the foresight to
hold on the government
securities that have been nearly
worthless for years but this was
horrified to Jefferson and
Madison and their supporters who
are not just sudden of
supporters who are not just
southern planters in Western
settlers
but also but eventually also a
majority chunk of the craftsman
workers and poor farmers of the
Northeast especially in the
cities
so for instance philadelphia
area Philadelphia
becomes one of the sensors of
becomes one of the Centers of
Jeffersonian republicanism in
the north
hence one of the major themes in
the national gazettes a
newspaper that Jefferson Madison
help start Brooke to broadcast
their criticisms is a familiar
one in the annals of the
American left the way the
finance industry and the
government put the government
policies that favored it created
we're creating social
inequalities that would curdle
America's hard-won liberties and
betray the Democratic promise to
the revolution
so on the so this is what you
have on the right of the
government early American
politics are a group of
politicians who enjoyed the
support of the wealthiest
Americans in the bulk of what we
would now call the business
community then it would be more
like we called merchants or
something like that
these defenders of the
government of the of the
Washington ministrations
policies came to call themselves
federalist after the pro
Constitution forces during the
17 87 88 ratification debate and
hear you
the party names are almost
always either something somebody
else called you or an attempt to
criticize the other side so the
for the Hamilton that the panels
and supporters call themselves
federalist because that's the
name of the people who support
the Constitution the message
they're being that the other
guys don't support the
Constitution that they're trying
to overthrow it if you're not a
federalist you must be against
the Constitution Jefferson's
group on the lack of early
American politics call
themselves Republicans in
keeping with their claim that
the inequality loving federal is
secretly yearn for a monarchy
which they kind of uses their
sort of all purpose sometimes
talked about is a reality
sometimes talk about it
talked about as a kind of
all-purpose symbol of inequality
so by call themselves
Republicans they were claiming
that the Federalists were in
fact actually markets not
Republicans the Federalist in
return and to explain how the
names change later on the
Federalist in return taunted the
Republicans as Democrats as a
word that yet with Democrats
oh my god a word that's conduct
the dense conjured scary visions
of social leveling but
eventually stuck is the
preferred Appalachian for the
party of Jefferson over a long
process of the next 20 or 30
years and again something that
actually kind of comes out of
Philadelphia adopting the word
Democrats they're not insulting
us they're describing us the
terms left and right would not
have been self-applied by
American politicians in the
1790s but they were not
anachronistic terms
I think I've got so this this is
the National is that which I'm
not really going to talk about
too much for this is the
newspaper that Jefferson
Jefferson Madison help start
actually well Jefferson was
still in office
that's the incident where Philip
for no fluid French feet where
we're filled for know that
editor of the national debt was
hired as a French translator in
Jefferson's office which is kind
of funny because Jefferson
course was a fluent French
speaker and writer and the last
job he needed in the world last
Employee needed in the world was
a French translator so he said
you know whatever you want to do
on the side whatever you have
your spirit do in your spare
time that would be fine
which turned out to be editing
this newspaper as i started 11
terms left and right would not
have been self implied
self-applied by the 1700s but
they were not an accurate or not
in a crystal they were invented
to describe the radical more
conservative factions of the
French Revolution an event that
was unfolding across the ocean
exactly the same time the french
revolution or rather the proper
American sport response to it
also happens to be the other
major issue that divided the
founders into competing parties
Jefferson and his followers
thrilled to the french
revolutionary vision of
universal liberation social
equality and at least what they
thought was progressive rational
government Hamilton and his
allies were horrified on the
other hand by the dangers of the
revolutionary spirit post the
law and order the Christian
religion and the existing
arrangements of society
including a hierarchy of wealth
property and Status a hierarchy
of wealth property status and
lifestyle that was far more
pronounced than that
was now this is still a time
when no one did anything with
their hands they could have that
they could afford a servant
harvest a servant or slave do it
for them and when service were
actually necessary to achieve
even what we now would think of
as basic levels of hygiene does
this say you could have clean
clothes every day
you couldn't have water to drink
all the time if you didn't have
you couldn't pay for servants or
slaves and so most people didn't
know i think i got the studying
there's a there's a
there we go out of order
slightly there when edmonton a
citizen janae the first
diplomatic envoy from the French
Republic arrived American fans
of the French Revolution started
Democrat what we call democratic
societies the most celebrated
the french republic and
criticize the Washington
ministration federal is
considered them the vanguard of
a new revolution that they did
not they were not in favor of
and a tool of foreign subversion
in reality the democratic
societies were more like the
opposite of beginnings of an
opposition party but that was no
reassurance given the fears that
existed about parties for most
Federalists and especially for
President Washington periodic
elections were were all the
popular input that a republican
government required and the only
popular constitutional form and
they just met voting not
everything that we know think it
was going to elect going into an
election not a campaign and
certainly not constant criticism
of the government by by some
group of people between
elections of things that parties
do constant criticism of the
government between elections by
people who have no one has
elected to anything was
distasteful and dangerous
federalist hope federalist hoped
it would go away and mended that
many wish to make it go away
that is to say this phenomenon
of people out you're out of
doors as they said criticizing
the government all the time they
wanted to go away and they try
to make it go away when they got
the chance later on with the
alien and sedition acts which is
largely about the opposition
party in the meantime in in this
. we're talking about the
largest army ever filled on
American soil was sent down to
put the
put down the whiskey rebellion
which Washington blamed on the
democratic societies mostly
unjustly the competing attitudes
toward the french revolution
also led to the bitter debate
over foreign policy that animate
this is this is the slide that I
had a world where there's chief
justice john jay and his treaty
is what you're looking at there
for so foreign policy animates
the politics of tempting I six
more than any other issue
citizen Jeanette come to seek
American support in the French
in in the french war against the
monarchies of Europe that are
broken out to seek American
support as a sister Republican
as an old ally as the people as
the French stars you had saved
the American Revolution back
back
during the war the wash
administration responded by by
by making a proclamation of
neutrality in the win the
european war and then a
commercial treaty with Great
Britain negotiated without too
much bigger by a moonlighting
Chief Justice Supreme Court Jon
Jay Supreme Court and a lot of
spare time in those days so you
could go off you go off the
London and negotiate treaties
without causing anything to stop
mass protests erupted when this
tree was announced that is at
the scene betrayal this trip the
judge a tree represented that
the mass protests erupted and
those were followed by by a try
a drive to jl j street in the
house representatives which of
course is constitutionally
suspect since the court since
the house representatives has no
role in improving trees they
were trying to innovate and
unsuccessfully that effort
collapse in the spring of
nineteen seventy six and after
that a presidential campaign
with a competing candidate
opposed to washington hilton's
policies came to see the
opposition's only recourse
so the the the presidential
election of the first week the
contestants of the presidential
election of 1796 comes directly
out of these policy debates it
doesn't it is something was just
about Jefferson trying
Jefferson and Hamilton or
Jefferson Adams struggling with
each other
hence an outcome that the
founders had devoutly wish to
avoid emerged organically out of
their own
no competing beliefs and actions
and the wide public support both
both sides were able to draw
with its own designers working
short-circuited the indirect
Constitution electoral system
never had a chance
long before 1796 the Republicans
that attracted a news network of
newspapers
you can stick at speed their
message across the country
I say speed their message across
the country meant they could go
it happened in the only a week
or two which was of course
virtually instantaneous in their
world when you know when it took
a day to get from Baltimore
Philadelphia right so into that
world a week's time getting a
message all the way from dump it
down the eastern seaboard in a
week was a big thing then the
democratic societies got into
the act
the Federals for their part of
newspapers their own and they
count on the democratic
societies by drawing on the
influence of their wealthy
supporters shipowners merchants
and insurers were urged to tell
their employers and customers to
support the jay treaty or suffer
economic consequences
the to manufacture of public a
show public support for the
treaty to balance those mass
meetings against it petitions
were printed up and sent to
local communities with the place
name blank
the idea was that then a town
meeting could be organized by
the local merchants that would
approve that message as their
own and then send it back to
Philadelphia swith the blanks
filled in
fortunately I don't have an
illustration of that today we
call that astro turf
in other words where you have a
message a pre-written message
sent out sent out from a central
place that's been filled in and
sent back to sort of said to to
put to present at least the
illusion of a public groundswell
of support so i'm going to skip
over the slow process by which
the various candidates emerged
or flamed out
you can read about that at great
length in my book and I don't
know
they have some here but it's
it's a it's a it's a it's a it's
a page-turner but it will also
and also a door stopper
so i'll just have very wide
margins at any rate it has lots
of things i'm not going to be
able to talk about including the
soak the nomination process
which of course isn't the
process at all it couldn't even
begin until nobody could even
say anything until Jefferson
till Washington spare will
address was released which
doesn't happen till September
at any rate by September 1796
former Secretary of State Thomas
Jefferson vice president John
Adams were generally
acknowledged as the primary
candidates
no neither no don't either of
them participated in the
candidate campaign at all
both from both mostly home on
their farms ignoring the whole
thing and James Madison actually
didn't even communicate with
Jefferson during that time
because he was afraid
Jefferson was going to abruptly
resigned from the race if you
would talk to him so he just
didn't even speak didn't even
communicate with him at least in
writing their surrogates work
however were quite busy mounting
coherent but quite vicious
campaigns they use the
biographies and writings of the
two major candidates not like we
would use it today to show how
they personify the divide that
opened up in American politics
including the beginnings of what
we've come to call the culture
war so me go ahead a couple here
all right there's John Adams
john adams had a lot of free
time when you've been a diplomat
via in the seventies and when he
and especially when he was vice
president from 1789 to get
seventeen eighteen nineteen
seventeen ninety seven
he had ample free time and he'd
use that free time to write
thousands and thousands of pages
on political philosophy which he
had published and i should say
thousands and thousand right
thousands of thousands of pages
in in some cases where he's
copying because he but they
didn't use quotation marks the
way we use them that today so
there's an awful lot of atoms
his writings on political
philosophy there are actually
other people's writings on
political philosophy that he
just kind of forgot to label as
such but it came back around to
get in because then he's blamed
for things that all these like
sort of Marcus of the past had
to say
I got put Adams the store Adams
writings and the one that was
this one that you're looking at
your defense of the
Constitution's of government the
United States was the most
commonly discussed one they were
full of gaps passages that could
be taken out of context to show
that Adams was in fact the sort
of monarchist and would be
aristocrat that the Republicans
in long queues the Federalist be
in the crucial swing state of
Pennsylvania thousands of
handbills were sent out listing
the projection pro Jefferson
electric candidates and we can't
really read that but you i hope
i can describe to you what that
is at the top at lists at the
top it listed pro Jefferson
electric candidates in
Pennsylvania
they had to do that because the
Federalists to control the
legislature in Pennsylvania and
it passed a law saying you
couldn't have printed balance
you had the name every single
elector you to write every
single electric gate on you're
about to have a valid ballot so
it's a kind of 1796 voter
suppression tactic
I mean quite literally right
mean that's really literally
what they're trying to do so the
Republicans put out handbills to
show to make sure so people
could copy exactly what the who
the electors were but they
attached then
a lot of your reading guide to
jet to dry Adams his writings
especially in these are page
number little pull quotes with
page numbers attached that to
guide to reading the defense of
the American constitutions to
show you all the terrible things
that Adams had said about how
aristocracy was better that it
was better to have rich people
in office that that aristocracy
and Marquis were inevitable and
about half of these are things
that probably Adams himself
didn't even say but there were
things that were in the books it
all proof that according to the
handle that Thomas Jefferson is
a firm republican john adams is
an about Marcus test
Thomas Jefferson first do the
declaration of independence he
first spraying the sacred
political sentence that all men
are born equal John Adams says
this is all a farce in a
falsehood one of the pole quotes
which of those free to
Pennsylvania will you have for
president and in one of the 1796
is only straight up statewide
popular election campaigns for
electors most pennsylvania
voters charged chose Jefferson
there's another one of these
handles that quotes that I acted
at quotes Tom Paine talking
about how atoms has sons and
that's partly might partly be
out to start a real Marky
at any rate the atoms as Marcus
and add using Adams is writing
says gasps help that was one
Pennsylvania for Jefferson now
here at Mount Vernon of course
not going to get into another
part of the Republican campaign
where Tom Paine called a certain
person into hermaphrodite
because they were also attacking
at the talking attacking George
Washington as well he didn't
really mean a literal and after
he met yet hermaphroditic
personality which we can talk in
the Q&A what you know what the
hell that means
it did he did have a meeting
of course it was John Adams who
wins the election in the end and
hear much of the credit goes to
figures that even many people
have read a lot about the
founders have not heard of
I talked about concurrent 11
powell at the top of that the
top of this talk but even more
important was William L Smith or
William I'm not actually I've
had different reason how to
pronounce his middle name
I'm going with left and we can
just call and we'll email Smith
a South Carolina congressman who
helped who was hoping for a
diplomatic post in the Adams
administration maybe even the
top one that we didn't get that
Smith was one of the main
federalist major floor leaders
in Congress and he turned a
twenty five part series of
newspaper editors essays that
were later package as a two-part
paint but you see one of the
title pages here that becomes
the kind of the seminal hit
piece in American presidential
politics sticking out themes
that we rolled out anytime later
a candidate was perceived as
progressive or of the left
smith made Jefferson into the
original model that favorite
conservative target the fake
populists a pretended man of the
people who was in reality in a
feat elitist whose squishy soft
political sympathies revealed
the naivete of thought and a
cowardice of character that
render him totally unfit for
office now I almost want to say
he's the first limousine liberal
but of course that would be
anachronistic so we can go with
i was playing around what we go
with instead and I decided on in
slaving a gala Therrien it says
another illiterate and as
another litter ating littering
idea idea of the fake populace
because Smith also originates
the idea of attacking Jefferson
of undermining Jefferson's a
democratic politics by bringing
up the fact that he was a
slaveholder Smith relied on
Colonel Powell's account of
Jefferson's behavior during the
British Invasion for his
material on cowardice but he
also did a brilliant job with
setting up Jefferson is the
quintessential . you had
intellectual taking Jefferson's
only published book the notes on
Virginia is text Smith Lampoon
Jefferson as
opposed scientist whose dish
soap also called discoveries and
hope and homemade inventions
amounted to no more than
self-serving prejudice and
laughing will laughable given
crackery like an item that he
made a lot of the wonderful
this is not what this year some
of his is Jefferson course if
you put them on Charlie no
Jefferson like to invent home
office furniture she liked to
have been home office equipment
as one of his great so he's got
this is his collection of home
office equipment and one of his
a one that he didn't invent but
he was that he was a became
famous in various ways partly
through this is what Smith
called the wonderful world
league chair other words to
swivel office chair with little
candle holders now ironically
George Washington actually had
this one with one before he did
so it's actually should be
Washington's wonderful whirligig
chair but this was seems so
ridiculous to Smith that he
turned this into a symbol of
Jefferson's kind of Jefferson's
. eNOS and in and silliness
Smith described Jefferson's
furniture is this piece of
furniture is swifty and mode
it has the miraculous quality of
allowing a person seated in it
to turn his head without moving
his tail
haha at a rate there was quite a
bit of talk of the of the
whirligig chair in the candidate
in the Kansas in the campaign
1796 and while it's a ridiculous
issue
it's one is actually highly
symbolic of a more serious
cruises in the word they were
making
and why would my gym while Smith
mind Jefferson's writings for
humor
he also had you know more
serious issues he reminded
Christian voters about
Jefferson's liberal religious
views and connected them to the
excesses of the french
revolution that he was such a
fan of course the French
Revolution french republic as
you know i'm sure most of you
know abolish the Christianity at
one point and bad best it was
another case of Jefferson's
modeled a responsible thinking
Smith argue
Alexander Hamilton actually
originated this idea to smuggle
the digging at jefferson on this
team into Washington's farewell
address released just before the
campaign started extreme views
on religious toleration liberty
of conscience like Jefferson who
had said that he didn't care
whether
you know rhetorically we didn't
care whether there were a
hundred gods or one that it
didn't break his leg or pick his
pocket
views like these were depicted
as a character flaw or failure
of leadership in vain with that
man claimed attributed
patriotism who should labour to
subvert these great pillars of
human happiness a mirror
politician ought to be more
cautious about disturbing
Christian beliefs and
observances these firms props so
the duties of minutes citizens
Smith suggest that was Hamilton
in the farewell address
Smith suggested worse president
Jefferson might be a danger of
the Christian religion and
Christian worlds that the bottom
of the Bible itself might be in
some danger again the charge was
comes up later in american
american political history
taken together this was the
first attempt in American
history to Marshall Christianity
in the service of presidential
politics and it might be the
first time I don't I can't say
this for sure
I think it's actually the first
time that anybody use religion
in a campaign for office
there certainly were arguments
about laws and their arguments
about toleration but this is I
think the first time when it
becomes a campaign issue last
thing i want to talk about
tonight is the most serious part
of Smith's attack
it's also probably the most
surprising these days and i can
tell you from teaching students
most of what most people know
about Thomas Jefferson this
point was that he was a slave
holder and that makes it into a
hip that mixes mixes democratic
ideals in his other talk about
liberty into a piece of
hypocrisy that we can mostly
ignore this comes this kind of
this line of attack comes
straight from smiths pretensions
of Thomas Jefferson and it but
it came out in a way that maybe
a little surprising because
while we think of going to go
one more slide
you know we think of Jefferson
as a slaveholder primarily now
but that's not how Jefferson was
seen in 1796 Jefferson was
straight up a community despite
the fact is a slaveholder he was
straight up seen as the
anti-slavery Kate as a kid as
somebody who was for freedom and
progress inequality who had said
you would put some of the most
stirring words on paper that
existed yet
on this on this theme so when
smith goes to it
- to deal with Jefferson on
slavery does two things first he
does use the hypocrisy think he
has long discussions of
Jefferson's terrible passage
endeavor in the notes on
virginia where he talks about
this worry gets into kind of
biological racism in two retails
his theories about about
biological theories about about
black inequality so I did uses
the paki counter poses that is
he says on the one hand that's
bad science
on the other hand i asked how
that can possibly comport with
Jefferson suppose an
anti-slavery reviews but there
was another purpose for debris
of slavery fully lifted Smith
he was from South Carolina in
the Federalist we're trying to
get up we're trying to get
southern votes
another another candidate that
you know there was an invite
main vice presidential candidate
made vice presidential candidate
was a general charles pinckney
for Thomas Pinckney excuse me
for South Carolina later on 1800
they nominate another Pinckney
for for president / for
president
they intended to be a national
party in that net bringing in
that meant getting votes from
the south and so Smith's way of
using Jefferson's anti-slavery
views suggested Jefferson is a
danger to slavery that
Jefferson's model headedness and
his commitment is spotless
commitment to the pending
existing social arrangements
might extend to get to
endangering the south to
endangering endangering the
south by freeing the slaves and
even then goes on to attack use
as an example
Jefferson's famous letter to
Benjamin Banneker the black
surveyor and Almanac make
there's a lot of one of
manicures almanacs Jefferson of
course and this is an exchange
of letters that gets brought up
against Jefferson because
there's certainly some
condescending aspects to that
letter but the very fact that
Jefferson had exchanged letters
with Banneker what ropes set off
alarm bells according to
the left and Smith he called it
the fried organizing episode
that if Jefferson was willing to
lower himself to write a letter
to a black person that he might
be willing to lower all the
other barriers as well so
Jefferson basically was damned
use any slavery damned if he
wasn't look like a hypocrite in
an unfit person for office one
way or the other than those are
really actually just a few of
the attacks by the attacks that
Smith comes up with just three
of the main ones
let me finish by just reminding
you of course that by the
upright time this election was
was through the Constitution
electoral system was thoroughly
broken right was thoroughly
broken you ended up with a
situation where John Adams comes
in first but his opponent ends
up his understudy
thomas jefferson is vice
president thomas jefferson
having to go to Philadelphia all
the time not being able to back
on the plantation has a lot more
time in a sense to actually get
involved in political campaigns
and way he hadn't been before
and he's right there with access
to all the newspaper editors all
the documents and spends four
years working against Adams
working against Adams at after
their elected and ends up then
of course causing election to
come out tied again in 1800 and
finally after 1800 after the
time between jefferson and aaron
burr you end up with a situation
where the founders finally
admitted their mistake and wrote
political parties into the
Constitution by actually
allowing electors to cast
separate votes for for President
and vice-president acknowledging
the fact that they're actually
we're going to be national
organizations that actually it
was easy to come up with the
national political party that a
slow communications was no
problem at all and that
polarization was going to be the
norm in American politics from
here on out
so that's what that's I think
I've done enough time and thank
you for listening
yeah
Thank You job that was fantastic
it's a great book of course well
and any thoughts come to mind
I have the privilege of asking
first kind of questions here
you know you describe a
situation in which polarization
frustration a real sense that
the political system is working
with you wanted to work being
basically there from the
beginning
american politics why does this
country succeed under the
Constitution in 1792 not go the
way of so many other countries
who create their independence in
the midst of war
try to set up a functioning
government that fall into
anarchy
the revolutions breakdown but
what about the American
political system as frustrated
as people are and how they
perceive it should work
whether it does work well what
aspect allows it to sort of
assists in that in that early
I think there's a lot of things
you could say I think Americans
are very devoted to their dreams
and when I say when I say that
the founders acknowledged
political parties in the
constitution of course they
didn't do that literally they
just made to put a provide
vision in that actually kind of
accounted for that just the same
way
slavery's protecting the
constitution business and
actually mention so in some
respects we just people just
kept on despite the fact that
you know committed to the system
despite the fact that it was
broken um I think if i had to
really give a sort of serious
and you know a serious all-time
answer to the other question I
would say that I don't think
they're necessarily a structural
reason I think that American
elites perhaps were not as far
apart as they sometimes thought
they were that when it came down
to it you know there are several
moments where things happened
that were not carry as far as
they could
so the Federalist do pass the
sedition act right when they
after Adams comes in and they
partly because of this of the
election 76 that they remember
they almost lost power and
wanted that not to happen again
but they kept it within the
legal system and you know that
they they abused the law you
know they don't allow true that
the defense and they do various
things that are abusive but they
don't get to the point is
rounding everyone up right
they follow the law and they put
people in jail for six months
they put people you know that
they harassed them with with
legal proceedings but in fact it
wasn't enough to actually scary
one that with Republicans to
back them that denote by the
time the station ax men to shut
down the Republican press as i
talk about my other book that is
the plug from current into a
plug for my other book is that
they were trying to shut down
the repressed but they're
sedition act wasn't scary enough
to actually shut anything down
that more newspapers were
appeared by the end of that at
the beginning
similarly there's a couple
points you know the electoral
type 1800 federalist could have
they had the you know they they
could have blocked Jefferson
become president right they
could have done that right they
could have put in Aaron Burr and
probably then there would have
been so a civil war probably
spark that right
Virginia who's ready who's ready
to go to was ready to go to war
if they put someone besides
Jefferson on the pond on throne
sorry on the on the pin in in
power at the end of the election
1800
so in the law lateral you know
in a letter of the Constitution
the federal sort of had a
perfect right to do that so I
mean I don't want me to put down
to kind of personal the
Federalist a blue people blink
at various times or don't go to
the end
it is a great argument you made
so jealous
the rhetoric is so inflammatory
character debate so courageous
and the and yet you don't know
that
of course Americans episode
these guys many of these
positive live through a
revolution which they did go
principal so it is it is it is
something i think that your book
helps
I line there may be in luck
there's service from stability
and continuity in American
politics but there is a certain
fragility as well
he's as red Rick is is real
people do you mean they do get
the passion right there has to
be some point a shared
understanding of the rules of
the game
there is i guess i think i'm not
sure I'm not sure it's always a
self conscious that and I guess
I think that when we go in that
direction we tend to just that
tends to be the the sort of line
of thought that leads us just to
kind of set aside the set aside
some of these local conflicts
i'm talking about to say whether
such great men you know they got
along the end they came together
as founding brothers you may
have heard that form in the end
to help us through these
troubled times and I guess I
think that takes away from some
of it it doesn't allow us to
kind of see some of the things
that we actually have in common
with them
yeah actually let's open it up
one thing is you know like
phones that are going to go
around the room
link to actually speak
who's worse we got
yes I right here in front of my
friend the gentleman in the
camel
thank you you sir
raised our ship into the sexual
differences right all resolved
to break up
what were the key policy issues
of 76 or the probe issues in the
future they were serving and
while whether Hamilton's as I
think kind of tried to address
in in the middle of the talk
they were who was the financial
system you know whether or not
basically whether or not the
United the government policies
will need to kind of capital
development and building
financial industry and led to
rapid economic development
you know Hamilton's kind of
financial plans behind
Hamilton's financial system and
the other one was foreign policy
you know basically whether or
not the whether or not
America was going to try to
operate basic within the British
colonial system
you know independently but sort
of reach an accommodation with
British or whether we were going
to join you know be joined with
France in against the modern
against the market basically
comes down 76 that comes down
the straight up Britain vs
prince to the point that France
is like actually one of the
things I didn't say this talk I
sometimes say is that the French
actually gave us democracy the
French spent a lot of time
actually spent money in
Philadelphia trying to urge
Americans to have them on you
know you should be you should
decide to vote yourselves right
you should have you the view
like friends you should vote
that way and in fact the lease
Lisa the LJ treat the text the j
tree was leaked because a French
paid a Virginia Senator to do it
actually
or at least they pay it's not
clear whether it was a bribe or
whether it was just there paying
for the printing costs
so those are the parts so those
are the policy of it was stephen
thomas thompson Mason
yeah you know from right around
here right right good evening
is it fair to say that in the
run-up to the revolution that at
first introduced the political
party system in a way maybe just
usually as well so socially so
1796 in 1800 our forefathers are
in college they were not novices
to political system is we just a
new structure that because we're
going to have a president is
right
so that heresy and maybe nom
George Washington's presidency
was an anomaly where everybody
came together
I was in the reality well I
think that's probably right i
think certainly the chance to
polarization was there i think
the difference is that there was
no national structure in it
before the Revolution so that
yeah their individual colonies
had had their little mini party
systems have their kind of
ongoing battles but they tend to
be a bit more structural will
there be one sided be generally
and with the Royal Government
the other side wouldn't
and he also be much more
localized i would say in terms
of the run up the revolution of
you know the patriots and Tory's
whatever you want to call the
loyalists and Patriots of the
revolution that would be another
example they had a party to a
party system that did work right
in the sense that they didn't
end up you know they ended up
but not only fighting but you
know you're taking serious
action against each other and in
fact going back to ducks
question if the other republics
of the Federalist when they were
in power it act like the
Patriots did during the
revolution and took away
people's property and exile
people and
and is executed people then it
would have been hope you know
that was a whole other example
they had how this could be
handled and that i actually
think that's another reason you
know that's kind of in the back
of their minds that they don't
they've been there and they
don't want to go there in this
case so no I have a pretty loose
I i I'm only stories i guess i
tend to use the word party a
little bit loosely
i guess i would say party system
or even party should probably
reserved for the idea of like an
ongoing thing where you're going
to have these you're going to
battle for votes and not and not
necessarily come to blows
you are you still there because
there has been such a social
scientific evidence
fine art so therefore they never
accepts your party
yeah that would be nice and
writes a great essays on party
right we have our own party
he describes the two-piece
talking about what about to
become the third party
committees about this part is
the first one is that it is the
Patriots and the Tories the
second is the event was in the
many photos ratification debates
the third is going to be this is
this majority faction that he
wants to organize against
Hamiltonian which is going to be
another party so these guys they
got about already taught English
history they had a vision of of
two already
oh ok i'll be easy on myself I
agree yeah there you go
very easy to write it in your
research did you find George
Washington only or informally
trying to influence the 96 link
i think that he allowed you but
as this happened with a lot with
him he didn't he wasn't
consciously trying to but he
went along with stuff that
certainly was an effort to i'm
in one section that i actually
dropped out mostly the this talk
that I give sometimes is is the
third wall address right which
the farewell address now we read
it as this great but you know
that pain to non-partisanship
and this thing we look back as
this
it's actually like a nasty
partisan speech right that
Hamilton
it went from one of the point of
view right if you know who's
being referred to and what's
being referred to
then basically saying parties
are terrible if you're the
opposition right
who would do that and of course
it's the other aspect of it is
that Hamilton gets Washington to
delay the announcement like all
summer right and the words
Washington of course that wanted
out and 72 and he wanted to
announces that he was stepping
down for a long time
Hamilton explicitly keeps us a
name your first he delays in by
saying well I don't have time to
work on the final text yet i'll
get back to you in July and then
finally just he allows Hamilton
to kind of stall this throughout
the summer and Hamilton was
doing that specifically because
you didn't want to give any
other candidates a chance to go
right because no one could say
anything about being a candidate
as long as George was in place
so allowing allowing the
thorough with his is a
resignation announcement not to
come out to all 32 months three
months for the election that
denotes an act of partisanship
certainly it's not pro Jefferson
for sure
otherwise I think he mostly
stays out of it the policy wise
he was obviously quite
federalist by this time
yeah
this great stuff note of this
point we just recently acquired
it in the options of the last
week
Christie's is a great option
letter George Washington rip the
head
parenting in virginia in the
spring roughly ninety six
he's basically saying i wanted
to be known that this opposition
of the house where they're going
to pretend and funded as a way
to strangle his operation he
sees that is against the intent
of the framers you have used to
smoke e-cigarettes yes it will
make us all fools we had
attended the Senate the a decent
make treaties love to spoon to
lay that this is a political
letter that you know he wants
character basically spread
spread the word that you and all
. South basic see he is a
political animal and that is the
season you know where people are
mobilizing around these issues
that are going to have you back
to the presidency presidential
election he's definitely you
know on the side he would
consider right so right to go
and I think Jett just really
brings that out
brings up here let's get we have
to get away from this idea
anybody to be standing all of
that in that like to hear
it really is much more familiar
to us people
yes the other thing is the
appearance of being above was
itself a partisan know that was
a stance you were going for
right because it is not a choice
but not as useful
people still try that all the
time right but it but it you
know washing that was one of
things he was very good tactic
you know sometimes part of
tactics and he's very good at
yeah
also one big question push up
here we are burning
one thing that is different
obviously that the politics of
that .
ours is the pivot around
Washington President to cart you
get a selection is just part of
just rode pretty close
you know pretty well pretty
close
I don't know if the Mondale is
using my job doesn't even exist
turn around
yes sir but what we really like
oh I forgot sorry i forgot to
say that if you could explain a
little more than a conditional
recommendation about about the
Jay Treaty yeah well they what
they try to do is it's quite
lame really it's quite strained
and they their argument because
was that I there were certain
Commission's that in the treaty
calls for certain commission to
be created specifically one of
them have to do with the
adjudicating America no debts
with pre war debts so the idea
was that if you deny the
appropriations for the
Commission's that before him you
could stop the tree from you
implemented and in fact stop the
trading
so the trees already been
ratified already been agreed to
they're basically just trying to
like sort of mess it up you know
me and make it so that the
British will be getting mad and
reject it is kind of their idea
but it's it's a it's a shred you
know and then they
it's me and probably it's a I
don't know what did you do it
was a it's one of those moments
though when you know the
constitution in the Constitution
is really being written in the
1790s and after i mean i kind of
think the real Constitution is
written in the 1790s in the
early night in the early 19th
century when things that are
spelled out one way you know
they could have easily gone
I mean that vote they almost
Republicans almost one that vote
against the ridge a treaty and
you know and in there could have
established the idea i say i
said it's name of course you put
another way it sounds actually
much better which is democratic
control over foreign policy
right that for that the the
branch of government that
actually people can actually
vote for would have some control
reform policy but
constitutionally the read they
were standing on
really really thin if you stand
on the read i forget it
I mentioned that stage in their
life in your own any of you like
to find out for me
oh he's people of this doing
this and I don't know that I can
do after talking for an hour and
I don't know that I can really
intelligently run into many
alternate scenarios for you but
but completely totally right i
mean an incentive is in 1796 is
an alternate all you know if the
if there's no Virginia's has a
winner-take-all in 76 then
Jefferson's lose that electoral
vote you know the effect of the
winner-take-all system existed
i'm pretty sure Jefferson does
win because it's so if you have
to subtract Maryland because
Adams one most of and then you
have to you have to add North
Carolina add 14 pennsylvania at
the one from Virginia you know
so that's that's the kind of
thing you get into but I mean
know that a lot of incredible we
could have easily turned out
differently but there's so many
multiples I guess the reason i
shy away from this question is
there so many multiple parts of
these kinds of things that you
know you probably wouldn't just
change one another one that
sometime people sometimes make
up is say is well what about the
three-fifths clause if Jefferson
if there had been the
three-fifths clause wouldn't
atoms of won handily
well I see the thing is the
thing is that it's that's
actually not quite clear what
the alternative is and the one
hand i do you count are slaves
of the South they like the women
and children of the whole of all
the country who are accounted as
a full vote for purposes of
representation even though they
don't vote or are they 00 in you
know the old the effects of the
effects are actually quite
different no matter which ever
way you put that
so uh you know alternate
scenarios are very up and in
unfortunately this whole thing
about the statewide about the
winner-take-all stuff about the
how the state still about the
electoral electoral votes
that's like completely it's
completely influx for like the
first 30 40 years in their maps
and charts where they're
literally deciding every
election
you know the whole year before
six months before two months
before you know what's going to
it since it looks like who's in
charge of the legislature and
what arrangement do we think is
going to win for our candidate
so what one of the states which
means it's today right
it's kind of a thinks coming
back I don't know that i have it
i think Nebraska did it is
always want to bring this
fabulous date when they want two
men came to 12 minutes
able to fix the electoral
college right the district that
was going to be their only
chance to put a national we are
only two certainly allows for
more rights for the the minority
voting block right you right
ok yes ma'am right there
you mention
seal it
yeah
Oh
I don't know if i would say it
works so well i think it barely
worked and I've thought I'd said
the Constitution the electrical
system was broken and
immediately
you know I think it kind of it's
sort of accidental and you know
the idea that the American
political system work better
than the French is compared to
what right yes the American
political system work better
compared to mass death and
dictatorship right
you know what I mean you know
yet another you know the words
in other words yes we avoided
the reign of terror we didn't
end up with a dictator
good so good on us that doesn't
necessarily mean i don't think i
would say given that can given
the extreme gulf between the way
they thought it would work the
way it ended up working
I guess I would tend to not use
the word well for how it works
it
break down massively course
until you know except for the
part about keeping slavery
together for for almost a
century and then having to have
a bloody war to resolve that so
you know even the keeping on
part is a certainly an open
question
yeah I certainly think you know
they Americans were they were
familiar with the three inches
out of the popular
properly represented in that you
know that there's opportunities
that was the french break down
the house channel machines
dramatic transformation culture
because they had really know .
right
yeah well this is that the jack
greene the sort of Jack green
approach that it's all the
bridge right that the British it
that learned everything they
knew about most of what they
knew
in terms of political culture
and about how did how to run a
free government from the British
and just didn't get too far away
from them but I mean I think
there's there's a lot there's a
lot to that
like i said like i say my mind
yet I just find that I'm more
comfortable with the idea of
treating the solace kind of
contingent that we know it
worked but they didn't know it
worked
and there's some of the things
that they happen just barely and
even though it that we have to
kind of be even
we can look back and obviously i
like to look at continuities but
I don't think I mean I don't
think I just don't think in
terms of like of whether I don't
think in terms of success or
failure
I guess you don't have one
just as passionately that would
be so you're very smart guy
written about the . words this
is course in which are magnetic
culture emphasis on the right
culture
so what surprise you that in
putting this book together
you begin the project for you
after what was the thing that
you really you know came across
your game up on music let's
that's an interesting way I need
to rethink was there any other
definitely surprising things I
mean to be honest the story of
how this book can be as I
thought it was gonna be like a
little pamphlet
you know that i have written a
encyclopedia article it adjust a
little less just a little book
you're just a little book and
then just take just like a
summer
- right because I already
written no idea
it's a cycle p article on the
election 76 I thought I kind of
knew everything about it and it
was just a question of writing
it down and then I turned out I
didn't know anything about it or
and also it turns out that it
didn't though I think the
hardest part is there's there's
really no narrative to it in the
usual way
you know there's no you can't
start like a year before the
election how to make any sense
there's no nomination process
right so if you you know kind of
charged with doing the making of
the president 1796 but it can't
have the plot that those the
ready-made plot everyone you
know literally every other
presidential election book ever
has got this kind of like we
already made plot and I didn't
have that so trying to figure
out how to kind of block it out
was was was it was a challenge
and I guess I was I was I was
definitely i try to express a
couple times the talk I was
quite shocked by cut and run
I was I was I was quite shocked
by how familiar William else -
I'm is very know i was writing
this during two thousand eight
election in case you can't tell
and some of the things that were
deployed in the most president
of the 21st century presidential
elections
especially by conservatives
against the Democrats were just
like released seem so
premonition of some of the types
of things that William William
Smith was writing that it just
made me start to think more
in terms of a tradition at least
of conservative and liberal
rhetoric
you know at least a conservative
and finally Frederick's the work
you know there is it's a
consistent it's because
certainly the people who are
being conservative changes at
different times but the least
there's a certain constellation
of ideas and arguments that gets
directed you know Jefferson is a
great both parties
hold on there is
well that's the other side that
that's the other you know that's
that's it
thatthat's thatthat's the the
one that the left turns against
the right which is that it's all
about it's all better and there
are some kind of aristocracy
versus the people right whoever
without without necessarily
defining that very well
fantastic fine excellent
all those adjectives you let's
get happy
we have boats for sale if you
don't already have one right
outside the door
there is a sign
ok
you have my room really