Political Attack Ads, Circa 1800
 

Just in case you thought "going negative" was a product of our modern, supposedly less civil political sensibilities...

http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/29/attack-ads-circa-1800

:rotfl2:

"I'm John Adams, and I approve this message because Jefferson is the son of a half-breed Indian squaw raised on ho-cakes..."

"Filthy Story-Teller, Despot, Liar, Thief, Braggart, Buffoon, Usurper, Monster, Ignoramus Abe, Old Scoundrel, Perjurer, Robher, Swindler, Tyrant, Field-Butcher, Land-Pirate."
Harper's Weekly on Abraham Lincoln

"We did not conceive it possible that even Mr Lincoln would produce a paper so slipshod, so loose-joined, so puerile, not alone in literary construction, but in its ideas, its sentiments, its grasp. He has outdone himself."
Chicago Times (1863) on Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address (19 November 1863)

"The right honourable and learned gentleman has twice crossed the floor of this House, each time leaving behind a trail of slime."
David Lloyd George on Sir John Simon (1873-1954)

....children writhing on a pike....

:haha:

I looked and couldent find anyone calling anyone else bitches or whores or witches for that matter.

Maybe I missed it.

Probably because there weren't much women in politics ca. 1800?

That's because those kinds of insults are generally reserved for women candidates, of which, in 1800, there were approximately none.

Great minds, et cetera. :O:

Yeah, I remember a while ago thinking about this after I read John Adams (David McCullough). Our elections have been nasty since day one.

The "Murder, Robbery, etc..." quote has always been a favorite of mine, pulled out every time someone asks "When did American politics become so nasty?" The interesting part is that the most of them really were anonymous, published in one paper or another but not officially endorsed. The candidates themselves hardly campaigned at all.

The election of 1800 cost Adams and Jefferson their lifelong friendship, not revived until years later. The occasion was the death of Abigail Adams, who had never forgiven Jefferson, and was engineered by their mutual friend Dr. Benjamin Rush.

I'm currently reading a book about the the age of Dueling. Coincidentally it that talks a lot about the consequences of negative political ads, especially in the early USA.

Basically negative ads had to be anonymous because otherwise, under the social codes of the times, the writer would be challenged to a duel which he was honor bound to meet. His position in society actually depended upon it. If he ignored or refused he would be publicly pilloried as a dirty coward both verbally and in the press and likely shunned by the public as well.

One had to be careful not to insult a public figure like say Andrew Jackson for example because he'd not only literally kill you for it, he'd come off as just bravely and correctly defending his personal honor against a vicious (and now dead) low life slanderer. After all by the standards of those days a person who lets someone get away with insulting them without responding to a challenge is a dirty low life coward themselves worthy of similar scorn and exclusion.

BTW I recommend this book. It's been a darn interesting read.
http://www.amazon.com/Gentlemens-Blo.../dp/1582343667

^^^ Ordered. Thanks for the recommendation, August. I've always found the history and rationale of dueling to be fascinating.

I think that early on it was also considered improper to appear overtly ambitious in public life. Campaigning on one's own behalf was just too unseemly an activity for the kind of distinguished gentleman who was considered fit to hold high office. And you have to remember that we had just recently revolted against what we considered a tyrannical power, so for a candidate to look like he was actually seeking political power would probably raise more suspicion than admiration.

Oh cool. You'll like this book then.

This looks interesting:
http://www.amazon.com/Dueling-Sword-.../dp/1581604580

TRhanks for the heads up on the dueling book, the other looks cool, too...

BTW, while the attacks were anonymous in most cases, some were likely written by the candidates (I know a few have been attributed to Jefferson, for example). The papers were shamelessly partisan, as well. They endorsed candidates, and smeared the opponents by all means possible.

Hey, you're not a white, male landowner! Are you allowed to start such a thread?