Presidential confusion

[altivo]

Just got back from the library staff holiday party, which we now have every year around Chinese New Year (don't ask.)

Anyway, this being an election year, the theme was US Presidents. Each of us was to choose a president, and give three clues to his identity. Everyone had a scorecard to write down their guesses on, and small prizes were given out for getting the most right.

I thought my clues were nicely confusing, and in fact only a few people got it right. Here they are:

1. A Republican, he became President only after a protracted argument over who won Florida's electoral votes. His Democrat opponent actually got a majority (not just a plurality) of the popular vote.

2. He was the first President to have a telephone installed in the White House.

3. His first name is unique among all the Presidents: Naomi's daughter-in-law used a large paddle to cross the river.


Rutherford B. Hayes. (Ruth-oar-ford, or, as he was often called after "stealing" the election, Rutherfraud.)

Comments

[chibiabos.livejournal.com]

Hmmm, thought it was over Oregon votes

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Florida was the state with enough votes to matter, and they had actually sent two different slates of electors in, one for each side.

As with Bush in 2000, the decision was made in a way completely unanticipated by the Constitution. A Congressional committee was appointed, and in the end its members just voted each for their own party. There was one more Republican member than Democrat. The decision was rendered on March 2, two days before the inauguration was to take place.

[schnee.livejournal.com]

Here's a quiz from me:

1. He experienced the single worst defeat in US-American history for an incumbent President seeking re-election.

2. He coined the term "dollar diplomacy".

3. He is said to have had a love affair with the mother of Mr Burns. c.c

Who is it? ^^

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Should be William H. Taft, though I don't recognize the Burns thing.

Taft was the only person ever to serve both as President and as a Supreme Court justice.

He was also the only President to weigh over 300 pounds.

Contrary to popular rumor, though, he did NOT get stuck in the bathtub in the White House and have to be pried loose.

[schnee.livejournal.com]

*chuckles* Hmm, I never heard about that rumour... kind of a pity it's not actually true, though; that would've been funny. ^^

The Mr Burns thing is from the Simpsons episode "Homer the Smithers":

Smithers: Mr. Burns can't stand talking to his mother. He never forgave her for having that affair with president Taft.
Homer: *chuckles* Taft, you old dog.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Ugh. I can't stand the Simpsons. That must be a reference to the fact that Taft once pardoned a Mrs. Lottie Burns, who had been charged with selling liquor without a license. I don't think it was ever clear what the connection was, since she lived in Nome, Alaska, but probably there was a political favor involved. It did cause a controversy.

Taft did get stuck in a theater seat once. He supposedly said to his brother, "If this place catches fire it will have to burn around me."

[schnee.livejournal.com]

*noddles* That's strange indeed - I'm not a fan of pardons, anyway (seriously, when does a presidential pardon NOT involve a political favour of some sort?), but for selling liquor without a license? That really does make you wonder...

And he did? Oh my. ^^

[gabrielhorse.livejournal.com]

*nods* I'm no fan of the Simpsons either. It's one of those shows like the Colbert Report I went through like a fad and liked breifly, but at some point began to engage critical thinking skills and found one disenchanting element after another. When done with any teleivsion, this is bound to crop up a myraid of troubling things... hence the reason fans do very little of it.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

And the reason I do none of it any more. Watching television is like reading tabloid newspapers in the supermarket. Pure crap.

[bonnie-tiler.livejournal.com]

hear hear! tv is not worth a second of anybodys attention.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I thought you folks got somewhat better programming than we usually do. The BBC does do some good stuff as well, but the only way to get it over here is on DVD or by having satellite or cable tv. We generally borrow the DVDs if we want to see that. No point in paying for satellite because we wouldn't watch it.

[bonnie-tiler.livejournal.com]

We do have a lot of films and stuff that we watch when we want to,without commercial breaks.
If there's anything you'd want to see, maybe we have it here. Could copy and send, just ask!!
And, of course there is http://thepiratebay.org/ , but don't tell...lol

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

You should've picked Ben Harrison for the sheer obscurity.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Oh, but Harrison is easy to spot. The tough one that I missed, and so did everyone else, was Millard Fillmore.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

Yikes. I'm reading up on American history right now and I still had to go and find out who on earth he was.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Fillmore is the butt of many jokes that involve his name being mentioned and people saying "Millard WHO?"

Other Presidents who are largely forgotten and perhaps for good reason include:

Chester Alan Arthur
Franklin Pierce
James Knox Polk
James Buchanan

And, from our own era, likely to be forgotten eventually in my opinion:

Gerald Ford
George H. W. Bush (the senior Bush)

Unfortunately, George W. Bush will live on in infamy. I guarantee it. He may one day be rated the "worst President" of his time.

[goldenstallion.livejournal.com]

Whinnyhi, Rider.

Well, first I thought it was Bush cuz of the Florida chads. But then the telephone... figured someone more turn-of-century. Of course voter fraud has come up again and again since the very beginning. Heh, whenever people get upset about current politics all they have to do is go back and read newspapers through the 1800's... those political cartoons were scathing.

Imperator.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Absolutely. Two things have really stuck in my mind about Bush in 2000. One is that in all the press furor over that election, hardly anyone remembered to even mention Hayes and the election of 1876. Samuel Tilden should have been elected President back then, just as Albert Gore should have been in 2000. It's difficult to even imagine what a difference there might have been.

The other is Bush declaring that he had a "mandate" from the people, which of course he did not have in 2000. He could say that after 2004, but not prior to that.

In both cases election reforms were instituted to prevent a recurrence of the problem. I don't think the ones this time are any more reliable than the ones from 1877.

[gabrielhorse.livejournal.com]

*chuckles* I wonder how he'll alter that "mandate" when he writes his own history books in the GWB library, sponsored by Shell Oil :P

[altivo.livejournal.com]

He'll need one hell of a ghost writing team to cover up all his malaprops and bad grammar.

Sweden news are not so good

[bonnie-tiler.livejournal.com]

I have to take the opportunity to ask a question; Do you think that it will be a Democratic Presidency this time? I'm just curious of what the general consensus guesses...
And of course... the choice of President of the US affects the rest of the world, even if sometimes it seems like the US isn't aware that there is a "rest of the world"

Re: Sweden news are not so good

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Historically, US voters tend to pick Republicans, I'm sorry to say. The Democratic candidates are not looking very good when you compare them to the way people have been voting in recent years. It seems that the only likely selection for a Democrat will be Clinton or Obama, and both have "defects" that I believe make them unlikely to actually win the election. (Even though I can vote for either in preference to any possible Republican nominee.)

The Republicans are almost certain to choose McCain now, and he will have a wide appeal. People are terrified of change, even though the majority now do not like Bush. They will not think about how a McCain administration will amount to just a continuation of most of Bush's policies, and especially his unpopular foreign policies. Clinton or Obama certainly represent some major changes, and fear of those changes will reduce their support level.

I will certainly NOT be voting for a Republican, but I'm afraid the Republican candidate is still going to win.

Re: Sweden news are not so good

[bonnie-tiler.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the clarification, And if I could I'd vote notrepublican too!