David Pietrusza1920: The Year of the Six Presidents

This rather shallow, miscellaneously detailed - even to the point of tedium - book looks at the many flawed, mediocre individuals who vied, or were otherwise involved, for the 1920 Presidency - both Republicans and Democrats. Some details of their backgrounds are provided, but most important to the author are their personality quirks and shortcomings, the various antagonisms that existed among them, and, how they did or did not cope with political forces, including the media. The title of the book well overstates the prominence of those involved in the election of 1920. The two actual presidents exerted minimal influence on the process: Theodore Roosevelt died well before the conventions and Woodrow Wilson, after suffering several strokes, was bed-ridden during the entire election cycle. The others, FDR, Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, and Warren Harding were relatively unimportant politicians at the time and were more or less dragged along by the course of events.Both party nominating conventions and the election are subject to detail overkill by the author: all manner of meetings with every attendee noted, whose standing is now up or down, manipulative strategies and deals of the moment, statistics of trips taken and speeches made, etc. The winners at those conventions, Republican Warren Harding and Democrat James Cox were both second-rate, second-tier candidates. It is only partially clear as to why Republican front-runners Leonard Wood and Frank Lowden and, to some extent, Democratic leaders William McAdoo and A. Mitchell Palmer faded so badly. The author's supplying of the vote totals of each round of balloting, while unnecessary, does explicitly show the change of fortunes.The author's focus on political personalities and considerations relegates the many important issues in the post WWI period to mostly cursory and fragmented treatment, such as the tough economic times with high inflation and unemployment, the flagrant suppression of the labor movement and dissent in general, that is, the Red Scare, and Pres. Woodrow Wilson's incessant, insistent pushing of the League of Nations - part of his plan for the settlement of the War. Also, both prohibition and women's suffrage, with an emphasis on political maneuvering, receive some attention.An example of the author's failure to provide context for issues is his handling of the so-called labor question. While the author does acknowledge Eugene Debs, the imprisoned socialist candidate for president and labor leader, as a champion of the working class, he in no way captures the decades-long labor-capital discord in American industries. Interestingly enough, the Wilson administration's mandate that employee work councils be established within places of work [not mentioned by the author] to ensure labor peace was consistent with his call for "making the world safe for democracy." However, after the War employers and government turned on striking workers with a vengeance capped by the excesses of AG Mitchell Palmer in his indiscriminate roundup of militants and the summary deportation of several hundred of them. While acknowledging Palmer's excesses, the author, ignoring decades-long labor grievances, basically subscribes to the notion of radical, out-of-control workers needing to be curtailed.Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the book is the author's detailing of the strange, obsessive, and contradictory personality of Wilson. He trusted no one and was quick to take offence, cutting off friends at the merest hint of a sleight or differences in policy. His inability to relate to others is seen in his tendency to lecture others in most any gathering. His progressivism was at best a thin veneer scarcely concealing his prejudices over race, labor, women's rights, etc. His insistence on personally conducting treaty negotiations in France is a perfect example of his compulsiveness. But his most egregious act was to leave the nation essentially leaderless during the last year of his presidency as a result of his medical condition by creating a façade of being alert and in charge.While the book is a chore to complete and ignores many important topics, it is not without some interest. The process for selecting presidential candidates is on full display and is not particularly encouraging. Harding was a nonentity whose agenda was merely to return the nation to "normalcy" - a vague notion at best. Cox never developed a coherent stance concerning Wilson's policies or on such matters as Prohibition. Unsurprisingly, Harding's administration was essentially a disaster, with several officials being convicted of crimes of corruption.The book surely reaches a low point in its considerable discussion of a crackpot professor's claims that Harding was of mixed race. That subject could have easily been dismissed in a paragraph, not an entire chapter. Another distraction about the book is the author's tendency to subscribe to jargon of the day, such as "irreconcilables", "reservationists", "stand-patters", and the like, with insufficient explanations provided. At least labeling a candidate as a "wet" or a "dry" is readily understandable.1920 is not an unimportant year in U.S. history. The unsatisfactory process for selecting a president that year is bothersome, but ranks well below the willingness of the American establishment to stomp all over the rights of those with whom they disagreed or did not like. That is the story of 1920 that the author does not emphasize. The jailing of individuals under the Alien and Seditions Acts enacted after the War started is dreadful commentary on American justice. The incarceration of Debs has to be one of the low points in American jurisprudence. It would take fifteen years and the Great Depression for the labor movement to rebound from its suppression after WWI. And the tolerance for Jim Crow in the South and the evisceration of the rights of a huge group of people is simple unconscionable in a nation that claims to respect freedom. This huge regime of suppression transcends the machinations of elites in selecting uninspiring candidates for president in importance.

The Election of 1920 is unique in American history. Never before had so many men who either had been, or one day would be, President vied for the office at the same time.But for an untimely death, Theodore Roosevelt would have been the presumptive Republican nominee and, given the political conditions of the time, probably would have returned to the White House. In the White House, Woodrow Wilson remained felled by a stroke but stubbornly held onto power and the idea that he could run for a third term. From New York, a young, vigorous Franklin D. Roosevelt laid the groundwork for what would become the longest Presidency in history. Herbert Hoover, the hero of wartime procurement and post-war famine relief, struggled to with the idea of whether he was a Republican or a Democrat. Up in Massachusetts, a mild-mannered Calvin Coolidge was on the verge of shocking everyone. And, in Ohio, Warren G. Harding, a man with a past so checked that he couldn't possibly be considered a viable candidate today, was convinced by party insiders that he could in fact be President of the United States.In 1920: The Year Of The Six Presidents, David Pietrusza tells the story of this election, but, more than that, he tells the story of what was happening in America in the years after World War One and on the cusp of the Jazz Age. Through it all, Piestruza weaves together a compelling narrative that brings to life events whose consequences reverberated through the 20th Century.There are plenty of surprises here. The stubbornness with which the ailing Woodrow Wilson, who probably should have been removed from office to begin with, pursued the idea of a third term in office (to the point where he was willing to sabotage the campaigns of Democratic rivals) was rather shocking, but it was also consistent with the unbending, uncompromising zeal with which he pursued the doomed League of Nations. Similarly, the star power of Herbert Hoover, who is remembered by history as one of America's great failed Presidents, is something that is missing from the version of history that is popular today. There was even, at the time, a suggestion that Hoover would run as a Democrat on a ticket with Franklin D. Roosevelt, the man who would replace him in 1932.Pietrusza also writes about the great social issues of the day and how they impacted the Presidential election. Prohibition, once the cause of religious leaders and gadflys, had become so popular that even previously "wet" politicians felt compelled to support it and, in Harding's case, vote for the 18th Amendment in the Senate. Women's suffrage, which had been largely ignored by the Wilson Administration, picked up steam; but nobody really knew how it might affect the 1920 election. And, of course, race was an issue. Not just in the South but everywhere and, at one point, a crackpot Ohio college professor, aided by state Democrats, published several anonymous tracts claiming that Harding was 1/8th negro.There are other stories throughout the book that bring the era to life. William Howard Taft meeting his old friend and rival Theodore Roosevelt in a Chicago hotel dining room and then crying publicly at TR's funeral in 1919. Eugene Debs sitting in an Atlanta Federal Prison while running what would prove to be the last Socialist Party Presidential campaign. Warren Harding having at least two affairs prior to running for office, one of which resulted in a child, and Franklin Roosevelt doing the same including one incident that resulted in the woman in question sailing to Europe, never to return.I should also mention Calvin Coolidge. Silent Cal has generally been derided and dismissed by historians, but this books brings him to life and shows him to be a decent, honorable, hard-working man of the people.There's more, of course, but you get the idea. This book is well-written, well-researched (except for a few mis-statements that clearly were missed by the editor such as when the 17th Amendment is mistakenly referred to as the 16th Amendment) and flows much faster than its 438 pages might indicate. It's well worth the time of anyone interested in American political history.

First, the title is misleading. Clearly it was used as a hook to grab readers, but 1920 was not the year of six presidents, but rather five (and actually four if you count the fact that Wilson was not really a contender for the 1920 democratic ticket-he may have wanted it, but no one wanted him). Theodore Roosevelt had died in January 1919, well before there was much talk about who would be running in the Republican primaries. Any mention of him as an actual candidate was all theoretical, but in 1918, if there was talk, it was very premature.My real problem reading this book, however, was comprehension. There is simply not enough background information provided by Pietrusza to make this book an enjoyable read. In terms of party and primary politics, not enough is explained as to the mechanics of how these conventions and elections were run. Not being an expert in American politics, I would have liked to know, among other things, how delegates could place half votes, or how delegates were chosen, which was only briefly but not fully explained. The lack of this leaves the reader missing something since the majority of the book focuses on the run-up to the two party conventions and the repeated attempts to choose candidates for the republican and democratic tickets. Knowing how delegates were selected and how they chose who to vote for, would have made this whole matter clearer.Also, there are a number of characters mentioned in this book. So many, in fact, that it becomes difficult to remember who was who and who was doing what, with which political party they were connected and why they are impotant in the first place. There seems to be an assumption on the part of Pietrusza that his readers are thoroughly knowledgeable in American politics of the early 20th century. Unfortunately, many of us are not, so a little more background as to who some of these characters were or why they were important would have been helpful. Some are given brief though not sufficient introductions, a few are detailed well, but most are just mentioned in connection with the main protagonists with little or no background. This makes for a tedious read.1920, did however, prove to be an interesting year. Warren G. Harding became President with Calvin Coolidge as his Vice-President, a ticked most people would never have imagined, and Franklin D. Roosevelt emerged onto the national scene. The race for this Presidency was a critical one, as America was hoping to recover from the Great War and the social upheavals that were taking place around the country. It's just unfortunate that Pietrusza spends so much time talking about the six presidents (most of whom had little chance of becoming President that year) and virtually ignores some of the primary candidates. A whole chapter is devoted to Herbert Hoover, who barely stood a chance in 1920, but candidates like Wood, Lowden, and Johnson, are only described briefly.While this book does tell an interesting story, I can only recommend it with some hesitation as there are probably much clearer histories out there on this election. Three stars is all I can give.

Go go Alabama!