Connect with us

Politics

Column: Has Trump just repeated the P.R. disaster that cost Herbert Hoover his reelection?

Published

on

Column: Has Trump just repeated the P.R. disaster that cost Herbert Hoover his reelection?

“Well, Felix, this elects me.”

The speaker was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was at home in Albany with his friend and advisor Felix Frankfurter, monitoring radio reports of a political disaster unfolding in Herbert Hoover’s Washington.

It was 1932. Hoover had dispatched the military to break up a camp of World War I veterans who had massed to demand immediate payment of a bonus they had been promised for serving. News of the cavalry’s gassing and trampling of civilians — the slain including an infant born during the nationwide march of the so-called Bonus Army — would dominate the front pages and tar Hoover’s public image through the presidential campaign.

Flash forward 92-plus years to Donald Trump’s rally Sunday at New York’s Madison Square Garden, a bleak, lurid festival of racist hate and profane vituperation so vile that even fellow Republicans, who have turned a blind eye to Trump’s character for years, are distancing themselves from the event.

Advertisement

Their fear may be that with this heavily promoted event, the fundamental loathsomeness of Trump’s political persona and behavior may break through to the undecided voters he needs to win reelection.

The occasion evokes the line sometimes attributed (perhaps apocryphally) to Mark Twain that “History doesn’t always repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” For the attack on the Bonus Army and the Madison Square Garden rally share features that could bind them together as campaign turning points.

As Twain might have acknowledged, the comparison isn’t perfect — among other differences, the Bonus Army attack occurred on July 28, 1932, in the middle of the presidential campaign, while the Trump rally came only 10 days before election day and after early voting by mail and in person has already started in many states. Trump threatens to turning the military on American citizens to quell demonstrations; Hoover actually did so.

But the events do rhyme. Let’s take a look.

Start with the main characters. Hoover and Trump became president after winning their first campaigns for elective office, and both entered the White House as wealthy men. The similarities end there, however.

Advertisement

Hoover had made a name for himself in public service. During World War I he had served as chair of the Belgian Relief Commission, which shipped food to that German-occupied nation, and subsequently as head of the U.S. Food Administration, which aimed to keep food prices stable while the U.S. participated in the war. After war’s end, he became director of the American Relief Commission, which provided food relief to the war-torn countries of Europe.

Hoover served as Commerce Secretary for Warren Harding and his successor, Calvin Coolidge — in which role he oversaw the interstate negotiations that would clear the way for construction of the great dam that would bear his name. Trump’s public service prior to his election as president was nonexistent.

Well, Felix, this elects me.

— Franklin Roosevelt to Felix Frankfurter, upon hearing of Hoover’s attack on the Bonus Army

Advertisement

The two came to their wealth by different paths. Hoover was a self-made man, having earned a degree in engineering as a member of the first graduating class of Stanford University and making a fortune as a mining engineer. Trump inherited his wealth from his father, a real estate developer.

Hoover, like Trump, saw himself as a savior of the nation. “He has wrapped himself in the belief,” his secretary of state, Henry Stimson, wrote in his diary, “that the state of the country really depended on his reelection.” Trump often claims to be the only person who can save America from war and economic depression. Neither, obviously, saw themselves clearly.

On the Democratic side, Roosevelt and Kamala Harris were scorned by critics as intellectual lightweights, despite having had successful careers in government — Roosevelt as a New York state senator, assistant Navy secretary under Woodrow Wilson, and governor of New York; Harris as San Francisco district attorney, attorney general of California, U.S. senator and vice president.

Despite that, FDR was disdained by former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. as having “a second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament.” Walter Lippmann, the reigning public intellectual of his era, deprecated FDR as “a highly impressionable person, without a firm grasp of public affairs. … A pleasant man who, without any important qualifications for the office, would very much like to be President.”

Trump and his cohorts incessantly demean Harris as — to quote the ever-fading Tucker Carlson at the Sunday Trump rally — a “low-IQ former California prosecutor.”

Advertisement

The Republican Parties of 1932 and 2024 were fragmented entities when they nominated their presidential candidates.

Hoover had proven during his term to be a technocrat utterly without political skills. GOP insurgents (led by Harold Ickes, who would go on to serve FDR as interior secretary) had mounted a “dump Hoover” movement at their national convention; it collapsed for lack of a candidate to take up the colors.

Trump prevailed at the 2024 GOP convention, though not without challenges from candidates fearful of his lack of appeal outside a core right-wing base — former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley collected a strong 40% of the vote in a series of primaries, but not enough to carry her to the nomination.

That brings us to what might be the turning points in both Republican campaigns.

For Hoover, it was his response to the Bonus Army. This was a national movement for early payment of a stipend Congress had voted for veterans of the war at a cost of up to $4 billion — but which was not scheduled to be redeemed until 1945. Veterans could borrow from the government against their bonus certifications, but only at a high rate of interest.

Advertisement

As the Depression tightened its grip on the nation in 1931 and amid soaring unemployment and the spread of shantytowns of dispossessed Americans known as “Hoovervilles,” veterans began to gather in Washington, uncorking fears of civil disorder.

Among their targets was Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, who was steadfast against early redemption. (Among Mellon’s grandchildren is Timothy Mellon, who is the largest individual contributor to the Trump campaign and other Republicans in this election cycle.)

The Bonus Expeditionary Force, as the Bonus marchers called themselves, originated in Portland, Ore., with an unemployed ex-sergeant named Walter W. Waters as its commander. They started to move east — “hundreds of thousands of men, women, children, and babies … walking, hitchhiking, hopping freights,” as Paul Dickson and Thomas B. Allen reported in their 2004 book about the Bonus Army.

Most of the marchers fell away en route, but by the end of June a Hooverville-like camp housing as many as 15,000 bedraggled men and their families had sprung up in the desolate, muddy Anacostia Flats area of Washington. They were fed with donated food, treated at a medical clinic set up on the grounds, and mounted a series of marches to Capitol Hill, where a bill to accelerate the bonus payments to the present day was being debated. (It passed the House but was defeated in the Senate.)

Hoover and his aides became progressively more fretful about the settlement at Anacostia Flats, especially when its organizers began to talk about making it permanent. There was talk about its having been infiltrated by Communists and rumors of planned violence. Hoover decided early in July to have the marchers evicted and placed the responsibility in the hands of the Army chief of staff, Gen. Douglas MacArthur.

Advertisement

MacArthur assumed the task of deploying tanks, bayonets and tear gas on fellow citizens enthusiastically, calling the camp residents “insurrectionists.” The prospect appalled MacArthur’s adjutant, Maj. Dwight D. Eisenhower, who claimed later that he tried to convince his superior that the job was beneath someone of his rank. MacArthur rebuffed him.

On July 28, the attack began, including cavalry troops under the command of Major George S. Patton. Two veterans were killed in the operation and 55 injured. A 12-week-old baby died after being tear-gassed. The tent camp in Anacostia was burned to the ground.

The following day, Hoover issued a statement explaining that he had acted to prevent the government from being “coerced by mob rule.” He kept petulantly defending his actions to the end of his life. In his memoirs he accused the Democrats of distorting the event, implying “that I had murdered veterans on the streets of Washington.” He charged that the Bonus march had been largely “organized and promoted by the Communists and included a large number of hoodlums and ex-convicts.”

As it happened, Roosevelt as president was no more willing to pay the bonus early than Hoover and Mellon had been. In 1936, Congress overwhelmingly passed a measure to pay the bonus immediately — over FDR’s veto.

The ramifications of the Bonus Army attack live on. It set the stage for the creation of a vast administrative infrastructure of aid for service members and veterans, starting with enactment of the GI Bill, which paid for tuition, textbooks and supplies (and $50 a month for living expenses) to grant returning veterans a college education, making American society into a meritocracy.

Advertisement

The bill was signed by Franklin Roosevelt in June 1944, a couple of weeks after allied troops cross the English channel on D-Day.

It also stands as a warning for Trump that taking military action against civilians will inspire a massive public backlash, which in that case contributed — no one can say how much — to Franklin Roosevelt’s landslide defeat of Hoover just over three months later. Roosevelt’s presidency established a new principle in American politics through the New Deal, that government exists to succor all its people, not just the wealthy.

share

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Nikki Haley responds after Trump says she won't be part of new cabinet, says she wishes him 'great success'

Published

on

Nikki Haley responds after Trump says she won't be part of new cabinet, says she wishes him 'great success'

Nikki Haley, a Republican who ran against President-elect Trump months ago, responded after he publicly announced that she would not be joining his administration.

Responding in an equally public format, Haley wrote that she wishes him “great success.”

“I was proud to work with President Trump defending America at the United Nations,” she wrote in a X post Saturday. 

“I wish him, and all who serve, great success in moving us forward to a stronger, safer America over the next four years,” she said.

TRUMP RULES OUT TWO GOP STALWARTS FROM JOINING HIS ADMINISTRATION: ‘WILL NOT BE INVITING’

Advertisement

Nikki Haley wrote a supportive op-ed about President Trump two days before Election Day. (Justin Sullivan/Win McNamee)

Haley’s gracious response came after Trump took to Truth Social to frankly state that U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, as well as former Secretary of State and CIA Director Mike Pompeo would not be participating in his new cabinet. 

The announcement came after rumors have swirled regarding President-elect Trump’s cabinet members.

NIKKI HALEY PENS SUPPORTIVE OP-ED IN FAVOR OF TRUMP AHEAD OF ELECTION DAY: ‘EASY CALL’

“I will not be inviting former Ambassador Nikki Haley, or former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, to join the Trump Administration, which is currently in formation,” the president-elect posted on Truth Social early Saturday evening. 

Advertisement

“I very much enjoyed and appreciated working with them previously, and would like to thank them for their service to our Country,” he continued. “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Nikki Haley visits Hamas attack site in Israel

Nikki Haley, former governor of South Carolina, during a news conference in Sderot, Israel, on Monday, May 27, 2024. The former US ambassador visited sites including Kibbutz Nir Oz and the site of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on the Supernova music festival.  (Kobi Wolf/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Haley during her run for the Republican candidate attempted to cast herself as an alternative to Trump, but eventually penned a supportive op-ed about the presidential candidate two days before Election Day.

The former South Carolina governor wrote the recently-published opinion piece, which is titled “Trump Isn’t Perfect, but He’s the Better Choice.”

“I don’t agree with Mr. Trump 100% of the time,” Haley conceded. “But I do agree with him most of the time, and I disagree with Ms. Harris nearly all the time. That makes this an easy call.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Andrea Margolis contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump blasts Newsom's plan to shield California from the next White House

Published

on

Trump blasts Newsom's plan to shield California from the next White House

President-elect Trump is not thrilled with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s aggressive, highly visible campaign to shield California from the Trump White House.

“Governor Gavin Newscum is trying to KILL our Nation’s beautiful California,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account on Friday, with his oft-used nickname for the state’s Democratic governor.

Trump’s post came one day after the governor convened a special session of the state Legislature to prepare for potential Republican-led attacks on abortion rights, environmental protections and disaster funding in the liberal state.

Trump wrote that Newsom “is using the term ‘Trump-Proof’ as a way of stopping all of the GREAT things that can be done to ‘Make California Great Again,’ but I just overwhelmingly won the Election.”

Newsom’s preemptive strike signals the return of the hostile relationship between Democratic-controlled California and the Trump administration.

Advertisement

In a video address to small donors and supporters Friday afternoon, Newsom said Trump’s criticism felt familiar.

“It’s a tired, old playbook of grievances. No prescriptions. No solutions. Just grievances,” he said.

The governor’s proclamation for the largely symbolic special session says his administration anticipates that Trump could seek to limit access to abortion medication, pursue a national abortion ban, dismantle environmental protections, repeal the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, and withhold federal disaster response funding, among other promises he made during the campaign.

Newsom is asking lawmakers to provide additional funding to the California Department of Justice and other agencies in his administration to immediately file lawsuits and defend against litigation from the Trump administration.

The governor’s aides said increases to the state’s legal defense would be paid for with income tax revenues that have exceeded projections in the current fiscal year, but the amount of funding will be determined in negotiations at the state Capitol. The special session is set to begin Dec. 2.

Advertisement

The president-elect on Truth blasted the “INSANE POLICY DECISIONS” of California’s Democratic leaders, blaming them for people fleeing the expensive state. (State data show that, last year, California’s population increased by 0.17% after three years of losses.)

“They are making it impossible to build a reasonably priced car, the unchecked and unbalanced homeless catastrophe, & the cost of EVERYTHING, in particular ‘groceries,’ IS OUT OF CONTROL,” Trump wrote.

Trump’s social media post included a promise to demand voter identification and proof of citizenship in order to cast ballots. This fall, Newsom signed a law that bans local governments from imposing voter identification requirements.

The president-elect also criticized the “rerouting of MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF WATER A DAY FROM THE NORTH OUT INTO THE PACIFIC OCEAN, rather than using it, free of charge, for the towns, cities, & farms dotted all throughout California.”

Speaking at his Rancho Palos Verdes golf club in September, Trump indicated he would revive his first-term fight with California leaders over water allocations and environmental laws meant to protect endangered fish such as the tiny delta smelt.

Advertisement

He said he would “revert water up into the hills where you have all the dead forests, where the forests are so brittle” in order to prevent wildfires. And he threatened to withhold federal firefighting aid for California unless “Newscum” agreed to “sign those papers” — an apparent reference to water policy, although he did not specify which papers.

In an interview days before the election, the governor cast Trump’s “Newscum” nickname for him as a win.

“We clearly are in his head and that’s a good thing, from my perspective,” Newsom said. “It means we’re doing the right thing.”

Though Trump and Newsom sparred on social media, in the press and the courts during the president-elect’s first term, their relationship wasn’t always fraught. The governor publicly praised Trump on several occasions for providing federal aid for California wildfires. And Trump also used a clip of Newsom commending him for sending COVID-19 testing swabs to California in an ad during his 2020 presidential campaign.

The pair maintained a cordial relationship behind the scenes, but it appears to have ended.

Advertisement

In his video address Friday, Newsom thanked the people who tuned in — 35,000 in total, he said — for their work to help elect Democrats in 2024.

He said he respects the presidency and wants Trump to succeed. But he’s not naive about the president-elect’s agenda.

“We know the playbook,” Newsom said. “He is going to be more, I think, aggressive than he was in the past.”

The special session is about getting prepared, the governor said, as he hinted that he has other moves up his sleeve.

“We’re not done by any stretch,” Newsom said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Women’s March Holds Rally in Washington

Published

on

Video: Women’s March Holds Rally in Washington

new video loaded: Women’s March Holds Rally in Washington

transcript

transcript

Women’s March Holds Rally in Washington

About 200 people showed up to the Women’s March protest and dance party in Washington D.C. The goal of the event was to reinvigorate the organization’s progressive base after the election.

(chanting) “I believe that we will win.” “Say I believe that we will win.” “I believe that we will win.” “Say I believe that we — That we will win.” “There’s so many people that came before us and had fought for our rights. And I would hate to let that legacy, I’d hate to let that go. (music)

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Washington

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending