Presidential Campaign Tactics of 1828 and 2012

Presidential Campaign Tactics of 1828 and 2012 Whether it was the 1828 election between Andrew Jackson and incumbent John Quincy Adams or the 2012 election between Mitt Romney and incumbent Barrack Obama, the parties representing their candidates strongly fought for their respective candidates. They often used the media of the time to bolster their candidate while diminishing their opposition with tactics that some historians and analysts have argued as being “dirty.” The political issues were often over-shadowed by mudslinging. Third-party candidate Ross Perot once said “War has rules, mud wrestling has rules-politics has no rules (Brook).” The campaign tactics that were used preceding the presidential election of 1828 were not all that different than those used leading up to the election of 2012. In the election of 1828, Democratic Republican Andrew Jackson, Old Hickory, was up against his former opponent from the 1824 election National Republican John Quincy Adams. Jackson, who had won the popular vote in 1824, had narrowly lost the seat of the presidency by what historians have called a “corrupt bargain.” By not getting a majority of the electoral votes, the Constitution states that the House of Representatives decides the outcome. When the Speaker of the House Henry Clay threw his support to Adams, it was enough to get Adams elected over Jackson. Soon after, Adams appointed Clay Secretary of State after this election and Jackson and his supporters saw this as corrupt. This led to harsh feelings between the two and a bitter fight for the presidency in 1828. The upcoming campaign would be full of mudslinging by both political parties (McNamara).
In 2012, campaigners would regularly use mudslinging as a tactic to get their candidate elected. Statements were made with no regard for the truth in hopes of discrediting their opponent. Peggy Noonan, a political columnist for The Wall Street Journal, wrote “with all the PAC [special interest group]