Politico features an equivalence of DRUMPF with Andrew JACKSON
********QUOTE******* [font size=5] [/font]
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/gop-2016-andrew-jackson-1824-213726
[font size=5]The First Time Party Bigwigs Tried to Stop a Front-Runner From Becoming President It Backfired—Big-time[/font]
What the GOP can learn from the story of Andrew Jackson in 1824.
By Andrew Saunders March 13, 2016 [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"] [/FONT]
America has never seen a presidential candidate like this before. Detractors point to his [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]lack of political experience[/FONT], his [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]poor grasp of policy[/FONT], his alleged [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]autocratic[/FONT] leanings and his [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]shady past [/FONT]. They believe this man [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]without much of a political platform (but[/FONT] with interesting [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]hair[/FONT]) has [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]neither the qualifications nor the temperament[/FONT] to be president. Yet in defiance of conventional wisdom, he is leading his three main rivals in the race for the White House, and party bigwigs are at a loss how to respond. No, it’s not Donald Trump. His name is Andrew [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Jackson[/FONT], and the year is [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]1824[/FONT]. ....
In the election, held in December 1824, Jackson stunned his rivals to win a clear plurality in the popular vote and Electoral College. With 99 Electoral College votes to Adams’ 84, Crawford’s 41 and Clay’s 37, Jackson was short of an outright majority, but undoubtedly had the strongest claim to the White House. However, [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]with no overall winner[/FONT], the decision was put to the House of Representatives, which was then under the speakership of failed candidate Henry Clay. [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Clay threw his support[/FONT] not to Jackson but [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]to second-placed[/FONT] John Quincy Adams. When Adams became America’s sixth president he returned the favor, appointing Clay his secretary of state.
To Jackson’s many detractors this was a legitimate move. The old general, who Clay referred to condescendingly as a “military chieftain”, was [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]a polarizing figure[/FONT] who had fallen short of an outright majority. [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Adams, meanwhile, was[/FONT] a highly capable politician—indeed in the words of historian Daniel Feller he was “probably [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]the most qualified[/FONT] man to be president the United States has [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]ever[/FONT] produced.” Clay and his allies believed Adams could be a consensus choice, a man with the integrity and experience to unite the nation. A furious Jackson, however, blasted the deal as [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]a “Corrupt Bargain.”[/FONT] From his perspective, Clay and Adams had conspired against him, putting their own interests above of the will of the people.
Whatever the truth, [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]the deal backfired[/FONT]. The snub [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]steeled Jackson for revenge[/FONT] and allowed him to paint the administration as corrupt and out of touch. What’s more, it [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]fired up Jackson’s supporters and united a broad coalition[/FONT] of politicians and voters including many who had not supported him the first time round. This coalition would grow into a brand new political entity—the Democratic Party. It would also catapult Jackson to the White House just four years later, where he became one of America’s most consequential and controversial presidents. John Quincy Adams, however, would serve one unremarkable term, hamstrung by his minority status and dogged by claims of illegitimacy.
After the controversy of 1824, the election of [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]1828[/FONT] was surely [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]the most ill-tempered presidential campaign[/FONT] in history. Jackson’s supporters slammed Adams as effete and elitist. In an assault that puts Trump’s insults to shame, they claimed, falsely, that as minister to Russia, Adams procured an American virgin for the Czar. They were, in effect, calling the president a pimp. Meanwhile Adams and his allies hit back, [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]attacking Jackson as barely literate, as a bigamist and as a murderer[/FONT] who had executed several of his own soldiers for minor infractions. [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Astonishingly, all these accusations were true[/FONT], and yet—in a sign that should worry Trump’s antagonists—none of them stuck. Instead, they seemed to make Old Hickory even more popular, underscoring the fact that he was quite unlike most politicians. Jackson won the 1828 election in a landslide. ....
********UNQUOTE********
