In 1928, the Democratic Party nominated NY Governor Al Smith as its candidate for President--a move that had at least a few parallels with the nomination of Barack Obama 80 years later. It was the first time a major party had nominated a Catholic to run for President, it brought new voters to the Democratic Party, and it lost a portion of white Protestants in the South. Smith's earlier career--though far more varied and illustious than Obama's--also had some rough parallels, including a progressive reputation (with a lot more to show for it) as well as a relationship big city machine politics. But the reason I titled this diary "The Party of Al Smith" is because of what happened after the 1932 election--one which saw him bitterly try to block FDR's nomination, although he did support FDR in the general election.
Smith's style of progressivism included working closely with business leaders, and was reflective of the policies of the First New Deal, when the National Recovery Act tried to stabilize the economy through what was basically a cartelistic approach. It didn't work, and FDR, to his credit, realized as much. It also got overturned by the Supreme Court. As business leaders became more oppositional to Roosevelt, he turned left, drawing support from the rapidly-growing labor movement, and the Second New Deal--the one that's remembered to this day--was significantly more populist, and "progressive" as we generally understand the term today. This turn of events rekindled his animosity to FDR, and Smith ended up supporting the GOP in both the 1936 and 1940 elections. (Smith died in 1944.)
Smith was a progressive in the framework of pre-1932 politics--a period of time in which middle-class progressives were often bitterly at war with working-class socialists. But he revolted against the embrace of populism the came with the New Deal, a period of time when progressive and socialist politics converged with one another. For all the elitism that remained in place, and the anti-populist attitudes that John Emerson has written about here, the post-1932 Party of FDR was dramatically to the left of where it had been pre-1932, and where it would have remained if Smith had been the candidate in 1932, instead of Roosevelt.
With Obama, all that has changed. With Obama, the Democrats are no longer the Party of FDR. They are the Party of Al Smith--a good and decent man, by all accounts, but his politics, not so much. He was, quite simply, out of touch with what had happened in the world after his 1928 run. As David Mizner notes in a quick hit:
The majority of voters who said the Massachusetts economy is not so good or poor (52%) voted for Brown by 56% to 39%. However, voters who said the economy was excellent, good, or fair supported Coakley by 52% to 43%.
The extent to which Coakley's mediocrity played a role, as opposed to national factors, is, of course, impossible to pin down. I think they probably reinforced each other, creating a general impression of out-of-touchness.
Smith is a largely forgotten figure in American history today. But if you look at the National Democratic Party, it's actually FDR who's been forgotten--his mistakes, such as trying to cut back spending and balance the budget prematurely in 1937, as much as triumphs. Al Smith, OTOH, is remembered in every breath they take, every move they make, every mistake on top of every mistake on top of every mistake on top of every mistake.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment. blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
