Using the San Diego Union Tribune, I attempted to find similarities between the reporting on the presidential races of 1932 and the current race of 2020. I ultimately focused my search towards the parties and their choosing of front-runners. Initially, though, I thought I’d research what the reporting looked like on the coverage of taxation and then immigration. As it turns out, taxation was indeed widely covered in 1932, yet it didn’t appear to have much in common with what the Tribune was reporting today. Likewise, the coverage of immigration in 1932 was more about the arrest and deportation of small handfuls of undocumented workers. The issue of immigration today is more widespread and appears to have taken on a whole new meaning.
Upon an extensive and lengthy review of several issues of the Tribune, I stumbled on an article written on March 17, 1932. The article is found on page 4 and it is titled: “No Man– or Plan”. Effectively, this article discussed the Democratic party’s uncertainty on choosing a front-runner. This was evident from the author writing: “There is, however, no semblance of a unified plan in the Democratic program, unless a studied effort to avoid positive commitment in any direction could be called a plan” (SDUT, 1932 p.4). The author then went on to say: “No, unless a miracle happens, we just can’t see any ‘Sweeping Democratic Victory’ in this Republican state [California]” (SDUT, 1932 p.4). It would appear that even in 1932, when faced with many national and international issues, the party appeared to be unable to unite around any one issue.
Looking to find a current report to compare this issue to today, I was quick to find an article written on October 28, 2019, titled: “Growing Uncertainty looms over Democrats’ 2020 Primary”. In this article, the author describes how the Democratic candidates are all over the place on the political spectrum. What’s more, the author points to how the amount of Democratic candidates running is hurting the party’s ability to garnish consolidated public support. The author wrote: “The historically large field, while in part of measure of the desire to oust the incumbent president, has also made it harder for the top contenders to forge a more focused contest” (SDUT, 2019). Sizing up candidates like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, and then Biden and Steyer, the author mentions how these political warriors are too diverse in their economic and foreign policy plans. The most poignant piece of evidence, which led me to immediately see the similarities between the 1932 race and todays was when the author cited the opinions of the voters. The author cited a voter by writing: “‘I didn’t realize the amount of people that we had as candidates!'” Borglum said. “‘So many people have a plan. Is anyone really right?'” (SDUT, 2019).
It would appear that history continues to show the cyclical nature of political campaigns when there are so many issues in the world. Additionally, a rallied and large scaled effort to get rid of the incumbent seems to draw out a large number of candidates hoping for the job. Unfortunately, though, the result could lead to too much diversity in presidential plans, thus creating too much division among the voters. This situation has the ability to cripple the chances of a party’s chances at gaining sufficient support to win the election.
Eric Schmutzer-HIST 336 