Changes

#Rebellion: In his opinion, the democratic party was in support of the confederacy and the civil war it lead to.

#Rebellion: In his opinion, the democratic party was in support of the confederacy and the civil war it lead to.

   

   

Blaine himself missed this pairing of three R's, but others did not.  In very short order, the Democrats began generating fliers, posters, and other forms of media and announcements stating that Blaine was opposed to Roman Catholicism (because Burchard said "Romanism").  This was apparently started by a reporter for the "Star" by the name of John Tracy. Tracy was known to be associated with the democratic committee, and regularly did work for them. He attended this event, expecting to only publish a paragraph on the event.  While only half-listening to the event, he heard Burchard using his unfortunate choice of words, and immediately realized the potential value in this phrase.  He immediately rushed across the hotel corridor to the telegraph office, where he sent dispatches to his own and several other publications, as well as democratic headquarters.  In very short order, publication began of materials to spread the idea that this was said against Roman Catholics, even though this was never the intended meaning. It is debatable whether Tracy himself understood the intended meaning at the time or not.<ref>[https://search.proquest.com/docview/554727568?accountid=46995 The Hartford Courant (1887-1922) ; Hartford, Conn. &#91;Hartford, Conn&#93;29 May 1897: page 8].</ref><ref name="DAB">[https://archive.org/stream/dictionaryameri02drakgoog/dictionaryameri02drakgoog_djvu.txt Dictionary of American Biography]</ref>

Blaine himself missed this pairing of three R's, but others did not.  In very short order, the Democrats began generating fliers, posters, and other forms of media and announcements stating that Blaine was opposed to Roman Catholicism (because Burchard said "Romanism").  This was apparently started by a reporter for the "Star" by the name of John Tracy. Tracy was known to be associated with the democratic committee, and regularly did work for them. He attended this event, expecting to only publish a paragraph on the event.  While only half-listening to the event, he heard Burchard using his unfortunate choice of words, and immediately realized the potential value in this phrase.  He immediately rushed across the hotel corridor to the telegraph office, where he sent dispatches to his own and several other publications, as well as democratic headquarters.  In very short order, publication began of materials to spread the idea that this was said against Roman Catholics, even though this was never the intended meaning. It is debatable whether Tracy himself understood the intended meaning at the time or not.<ref>[https://search.proquest.com/docview/554727568?accountid=46995 The Hartford Courant (1887-1922) ; Hartford, Conn. &#91;Hartford, Conn&#93;29 May 1897: page 8].</ref><ref name="DAB">Dictionary of American Biography Volume 3, edited by Johnson, Allen, page 271</ref>

There were two problems with this misinformation.  First, Blaine himself did not say this, or know about it at the time. Blane was not opposed to Catholicism in any way.<ref name="HC 11/3/84">[https://search.proquest.com/docview/554219295?accountid=46995 Hartford Daily Courant (1840-1887) ; Hartford, Conn. <nowiki>[Hartford, Conn]</nowiki> 03 Nov 1884: 3.]</ref> Secondly, Burchard was not talking about Roman Catholics, nor was he opposed to them in any way, as he later announced in an open letter.

There were two problems with this misinformation.  First, Blaine himself did not say this, or know about it at the time. Blane was not opposed to Catholicism in any way.<ref name="HC 11/3/84">[https://search.proquest.com/docview/554219295?accountid=46995 Hartford Daily Courant (1840-1887) ; Hartford, Conn. <nowiki>[Hartford, Conn]</nowiki> 03 Nov 1884: 3.]</ref> Secondly, Burchard was not talking about Roman Catholics, nor was he opposed to them in any way, as he later announced in an open letter.

Interestingly, not all Roman Catholics were turned against Blaine or Burchard as a result of this.<ref name="HC 11/3/84">[https://search.proquest.com/docview/554219295?accountid=46995 Hartford Daily Courant (1840-1887) ; Hartford, Conn. <nowiki>[Hartford, Conn]</nowiki> 03 Nov 1884: 3.]</ref> Nonetheless, this "three Rs" speech was widely publicized with the incorrect meaning, and was often directly attributed to Blaine. As an apparent result, the state's vote was turned in favor of Cleveland. The Democratic plurality in New York was 1,047 at the time, so less than six hundred votes would have changed the result.  Cleveland won in New York, and that state's electoral vote ended up being the deciding factor in this election.  With New York turned in favor of the democrats, the democratic candidate Grover Cleveland won the presidential election.<ref name="DAB">[https://archive.org/stream/dictionaryameri02drakgoog/dictionaryameri02drakgoog_djvu.txt Dictionary of American Biography]</ref>

Interestingly, not all Roman Catholics were turned against Blaine or Burchard as a result of this.<ref name="HC 11/3/84">[https://search.proquest.com/docview/554219295?accountid=46995 Hartford Daily Courant (1840-1887) ; Hartford, Conn. <nowiki>[Hartford, Conn]</nowiki> 03 Nov 1884: 3.]</ref> Nonetheless, this "three Rs" speech was widely publicized with the incorrect meaning, and was often directly attributed to Blaine. As an apparent result, the state's vote was turned in favor of Cleveland. The Democratic plurality in New York was 1,047 at the time, so less than six hundred votes would have changed the result.  Cleveland won in New York, and that state's electoral vote ended up being the deciding factor in this election.  With New York turned in favor of the democrats, the democratic candidate Grover Cleveland won the presidential election.<ref name="DAB">Dictionary of American Biography Volume 3, edited by Johnson, Allen, page 271</ref>

<!--NOTE TO EDITORS: The following hidden information is from the book "Rum, Romanism and Rebellion: The Making of a President, 1884" which has proven itself to be less than credible in some respects.  Please only include this following information if it can be verified with another source.-->

<!--NOTE TO EDITORS: The following hidden information is from the book "Rum, Romanism and Rebellion: The Making of a President, 1884" which has proven itself to be less than credible in some respects.  Please only include this following information if it can be verified with another source:-->

<!--Although charges were never proven about Blaine, he had an aura of corruption after two decades of high positions in Congress.  His Democratic opponent [[Grover Cleveland]] represented honesty and reform, though his political experience was slim.-->

<!--Although charges were never proven about Blaine, he had an aura of corruption after two decades of high positions in Congress.  His Democratic opponent [[Grover Cleveland]] represented honesty and reform, though his political experience was slim.-->

<!--Republicans discovered a way to counterattack on the reform issue when they found that Cleveland, a bachelor, was paying child support payments to an unwed mother. (Several men could have been the father, but Cleveland accepted responsibility.)-->

<!--Republicans discovered a way to counterattack on the reform issue when they found that Cleveland, a bachelor, was paying child support payments to an unwed mother. (Several men could have been the father, but Cleveland accepted responsibility.)-->