Changes

===Broad coalitions form each party===

===Broad coalitions form each party===

Both parties comprised broad-based voting coalitions.  Throughout the North, businessmen, shop owners, skilled craftsmen, clerks and professionals favored the Republicans as did more modern, commercially-oriented farmers. In the South, the Republicans won strong support from the [[Freedmen]] (newly enfranchised African Americans), but the party was usually controlled by local whites ("[[scalawags]]") and opportunistic Yankees ("[[carpetbaggers]].")  The race issue pulled the great majority of white southerners into the Democratic Party as [[Redeemers]].  

Both parties comprised broad-based voting coalitions.  Throughout the North, businessmen, shop owners, skilled craftsmen, clerks and professionals favored the Republicans as did more modern, commercially oriented farmers. In the South, the Republicans won strong support from the [[Freedmen]] (newly enfranchised African Americans), but the party was usually controlled by local whites ("[[scalawags]]") and opportunistic Yankees ("[[carpetbaggers]].")  The race issue pulled the great majority of white southerners into the Democratic Party as [[Redeemers]].  

The Democratic Party comprised conservative pro-business [[Bourbon Democrats]], who usually controlled the national convention from 1868 until their great defeat by [[William Jennings Bryan]] in 1896. The Democratic coalition comprised traditional Democrats in the North (many of them former [[Copperheads (politics)|Copperheads]]).  They were joined by the [[Redeemers]] in the South and by Catholic immigrants, especially [[Irish American]] and [[German American]]s. In addition the party attracted unskilled laborers, and hard-scrabble old-stock farmers in remote areas of New England and along the Ohio River valley.<ref>Kleppner (1979); Jensen (1971)</ref>

The Democratic Party comprised conservative pro-business [[Bourbon Democrats]], who usually controlled the national convention from 1868 until their great defeat by [[William Jennings Bryan]] in 1896. The Democratic coalition comprised traditional Democrats in the North (many of them former [[Copperheads (politics)|Copperheads]]).  They were joined by the [[Redeemers]] in the South and by Catholic immigrants, especially [[Irish American]] and [[German American]]s. In addition the party attracted unskilled laborers, and hard-scrabble old-stock farmers in remote areas of New England and along the Ohio River valley.<ref>Kleppner (1979); Jensen (1971)</ref>

[[Image:BLOODY2.jpg|thumb|350px|left|Democratic magazine ridicules GOP use of "bloody shirt" memories of war]]

[[Image:BLOODY2.jpg|thumb|350px|left|Democratic magazine ridicules GOP use of "bloody shirt" memories of war]]

Cleveland's second term was ruined by a major depression, the [[Panic of 1893]], which also undercut the appeal of the loosely-organized [[Populist]] coalitions in the south and west. A stunning Republican triumph in 1894 nearly wiped out the Democratic Party north of the Mason-Dixon line.  In [[United States presidential election, 1896|1896]], [[William Jennings Bryan]] and the radical [[Free Silver|silverites]] seized control of the Democratic Party, denounced their own president, and called for a return to Jeffersonian agrarianism.  Bryan, in his [[Cross of Gold]] speech, talked about workers and farmers crucified by big business, evil bankers and the gold standard. With Bryan giving from 5 to 35 speeches a day throughout the Midwest, straw polls showed his crusade forging a lead in the critical Midwest. Then [[William McKinley]] and [[Mark Hanna]] seized control of the situation; their countercrusade was a campaign of education making lavish use of new advertising techniques.  McKinley warned that Bryan’s [[Bimetallism]] would wreck the economy and achieve equality by making everyone poor.  McKinley promised prosperity through strong economic growth based on sound money and business confidence, and an abundance of high-paying industrial jobs. Farmers would benefit by selling to a rich home market. Every racial, ethnic and religious group would prosper, and the government would never be used by one group to attack another.  In particular McKinley reassured the [[German American]]s, alarmed on the one hand by Bryan's inflation and on the other by [[prohibition]].   

Cleveland's second term was ruined by a major depression, the [[Panic of 1893]], which also undercut the appeal of the loosely-organized [[Populist]] coalitions in the south and west. A stunning Republican triumph in 1894 nearly wiped out the Democratic Party north of the Mason–Dixon line.  In [[United States presidential election, 1896|1896]], [[William Jennings Bryan]] and the radical [[Free Silver|silverites]] seized control of the Democratic Party, denounced their own president, and called for a return to Jeffersonian agrarianism.  Bryan, in his [[Cross of Gold]] speech, talked about workers and farmers crucified by big business, evil bankers and the gold standard. With Bryan giving from 5 to 35 speeches a day throughout the Midwest, straw polls showed his crusade forging a lead in the critical Midwest. Then [[William McKinley]] and [[Mark Hanna]] seized control of the situation; their countercrusade was a campaign of education making lavish use of new advertising techniques.  McKinley warned that Bryan’s [[Bimetallism]] would wreck the economy and achieve equality by making everyone poor.  McKinley promised prosperity through strong economic growth based on sound money and business confidence, and an abundance of high-paying industrial jobs. Farmers would benefit by selling to a rich home market. Every racial, ethnic and religious group would prosper, and the government would never be used by one group to attack another.  In particular McKinley reassured the [[German American]]s, alarmed on the one hand by Bryan's inflation and on the other by [[prohibition]].   

McKinley’s landslide victory combined city and farm, Northeast and Midwest, businessmen and factory workers. He carried nearly every city of 50,000 population, while Bryan swept the rural South and Mountain states. McKinley’s victory, ratified by a landslide reelection in [[United States presidential election, 1900|1900]], thus galvanized one of the central ideologies of twentieth century American politics, [[pluralism]].<ref>Jensen (1971)</ref>

McKinley’s landslide victory combined city and farm, Northeast and Midwest, businessmen and factory workers. He carried nearly every city of 50,000 population, while Bryan swept the rural South and Mountain states. McKinley’s victory, ratified by a landslide reelection in [[United States presidential election, 1900|1900]], thus galvanized one of the central ideologies of twentieth century American politics, [[pluralism]].<ref>Jensen (1971)</ref>

====Populist debate====

====Populist debate====

:The Farmers' Alliance and the Populist demand for government ownership of the railroad is a phase of the same effort of the pioneer farmer, on his latest frontier. The proposals have taken increasing proportions in each region of Western Advance. Taken as a whole, Populism is a manifestation of the old pioneer ideals of the native American, with the added element of increasing readiness to utilize the national government to effect its ends.<ref>Frederick Jackson Turner, ''The Frontier in American History,'' (1920) p. 148; [http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22994/22994-h/22994-h.htm online edition]</ref>  

:The Farmers' Alliance and the Populist demand for government ownership of the railroad is a phase of the same effort of the pioneer farmer, on his latest frontier. The proposals have taken increasing proportions in each region of Western Advance. Taken as a whole, Populism is a manifestation of the old pioneer ideals of the native American, with the added element of increasing readiness to utilize the national government to effect its ends.<ref>Frederick Jackson Turner, ''The Frontier in American History,'' (1920) p. 148; [http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22994/22994-h/22994-h.htm online edition]</ref>  

In the 1930s [[C. Vann Woodward]] stressed the southern base, seeing the possibility of a black-and-white coalition of poor against the overbearing rich. Georgia politician Tom Watson served as Woodward's hero.<ref>C. Vann Woodward, '' Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel'' (1938); Woodward, "Tom Watson and the Negro in Agrarian Politics," ''The Journal of Southern History,'' Vol. 4, No. 1 (Feb., 1938), pp. 14-33</ref>  In the 1950s, however, scholars such as [[Richard Hofstadter]] portrayed the Populist movement as an irrational response of backward-looking farmers to the challenges of modernity. The antithesis of anti-modern Populism was modernizing Progressivism in this model, with such leading progressives as [[Theodore Roosevelt]], [[Robert LaFollette]] and [[Woodrow Wilson]] had been vehement enemies of Populism, though [[William Jennings Bryan]] did cooperate with them and accepted the Populist nomination in 1896.<ref>Richard Hofstadter, '' The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R.'' (1955</ref>  

In the 1930s [[C. Vann Woodward]] stressed the southern base, seeing the possibility of a black-and-white coalition of poor against the overbearing rich. Georgia politician Tom Watson served as Woodward's hero.<ref>C. Vann Woodward, '' Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel'' (1938); Woodward, "Tom Watson and the Negro in Agrarian Politics," ''The Journal of Southern History,'' Vol. 4, No. 1 (Feb., 1938), pp. 14-33</ref>  In the 1950s, however, scholars such as [[Richard Hofstadter]] portrayed the Populist movement as an irrational response of backward-looking farmers to the challenges of modernity. The antithesis of anti-modern Populism was modernizing Progressivism in this model, with such leading progressives as [[Theodore Roosevelt]], [[Robert LaFollette]] and [[Woodrow Wilson]] had been vehement enemies of Populism, though [[William Jennings Bryan]] did cooperate with them and accepted the Populist nomination in 1896.<ref>Richard Hofstadter, '' The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R.'' (1955)</ref>  

In 2007 Charles Postel rejected the notion that the Populists were traditionalistic and anti-modern. Quite the reverse, he argued, the Populists aggressively sought self-consciously progressive goals. They sought diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge, formed highly centralized organizations, launched large-scale incorporated businesses, and pressed for an array of state-centered reforms. Hundreds of thousands of women committed to Populism seeking a more modern life, education, and employment in schools and offices. A large section of the labor movement looked to Populism for answers, forging a political coalition with farmers that gave impetus to the regulatory state. Progress, however, was also menacing and inhumane, Postel notes. White Populists, embraced social-Darwinist notions of racial improvement, Chinese exclusion and the humiliation and brutality of separate-but-equal.<ref>Charles Postel, ''The Populist Vision'' (2007)</ref>

In 2007 Charles Postel rejected the notion that the Populists were traditionalistic and anti-modern. Quite the reverse, he argued, the Populists aggressively sought self-consciously progressive goals. They sought diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge, formed highly centralized organizations, launched large-scale incorporated businesses, and pressed for an array of state-centered reforms. Hundreds of thousands of women committed to Populism seeking a more modern life, education, and employment in schools and offices. A large section of the labor movement looked to Populism for answers, forging a political coalition with farmers that gave impetus to the regulatory state. Progress, however, was also menacing and inhumane, Postel notes. White Populists, embraced social-Darwinist notions of racial improvement, Chinese exclusion and the humiliation and brutality of separate-but-equal.<ref>Charles Postel, ''The Populist Vision'' (2007)</ref>