Progressive reformers of the early 20th century must have considered the Great Depression a mixed blessing. While the crisis left many working-class Americans nearly penniless, Democrats kicked ass in every presidential election from 1932-48.
{mosads}But since then they haven’t won more than two straight contests for the White House, which would seem to bode poorly for them next month. On November 8th, they’ll attempt to win a three-peat for the first time in 70 years, something they also tried to do in 1920, 1968 and 2000.
In those elections, Democrats came up short. Now the big question is will they be able to buck the trend and complete the trifecta in November. Yes, in my opinion they will – without breaking a sweat.
Why will Hillary Clinton succeed where her party’s 1920, 1968 and 2000 nominees failed? She’s more electable than James Cox, Hubert Humphrey and Al Gore were.
Take Cox and Humphrey, the 1920 and 1968 Democratic standard-bearers. Neither man could claim that his political forbearer ended an economic crisis. For one thing, there was no crisis to end before Cox and Humphrey ran for president. Their predecessors, Woodrow Wilson and Lyndon Johnson, presided over the boundless prosperity of the pre-WWI and post-WWII eras.
By contrast, Clinton’s antecedent took office in the midst of the worst downturn in 80 years. Since then, Pres. Obama not only has ended the Great Recession; he’s created 15 million jobs and reduced the deficit by one trillion dollars when compared to 2009 numbers.
In the weeks ahead, Hillary can point this out, vow to provide more of the same and then start writing her inauguration speech.
Former Vice President Al Gore ignored this advice. He ran away from his predecessor’s record but had Gore embraced President Bill Clinton’s legacy, he may have lost thanks to the April, 2000 stock market crash.
No dot-com implosion, though, has swamped the markets this time around. In the 2016 election run-up, the economy has steadily improved and should continue to do so well into the future.
So Donald Trump v. Hillary Clinton will not be another George W. Bush v. Al Gore. Election 2016 will end not with the GOP retaking the White House but like the 1940 presidential election ended: with Democrats winning their third straight amid an historic economic revival.
The Obama recovery, Clinton’s follow-up, and another post-New Deal era
By 1940, President Franklin D. Roosevelt had tamed The Great Depression and laid the groundwork for the post-New Deal years. Now, as the seventy-sixth anniversary of the 1940 election approaches, history has repeated itself. A Democrat has ended a financial crisis and paved the way for a post-New Deal-like economic revival.
By the time Barack Obama entered the White House in ‘09, the economy was ready to collapse. In 2010, his programs took effect and over the next 60 months signs of a recovery appeared everywhere. During this time, millions of Americans entered the workforce, over two million in each of the last four years.
The unemployment rate dropped to 5 percent, roughly half of what it was in 2010.
Corporate profits soared and, in 2015, not only did the poverty rate plunge but the median household income rose by the largest percent increase on record.
Still, as Obama said last January, more was needed and more is what the country has gotten. A ton more jobs for starters, nearly a million more in the last four months alone.
During the same period, the real estate market showed signs of life for the first time since the 90s. In September, the economy expanded for the 79th consecutive month. This fall the Nasdaq posted all-time highs and the Dow, after doubling in Obama’s first term, again has started to climb.
So have the president’s approval rating, for that matter.
In 1940, Roosevelt crushed Wendell Willkie, a business tycoon and one-time Democrat who had never held public office, and won a third term. Next month, the Clintons will replicate the feat and help their party three-peat for the first time since 1948. In 2020, they’ll win again for the same reason FDR won in 1944 in the wake of the pre-WWII boom.
After the Clintons take over in January, they’ll pick up where their predecessor left off. Following Obama’s lead, they’ll complete the Afghan troop withdrawal, further reduce defense spending, pass middle-class tax cuts and, in the process, revive memories of the 1990s.
In the Clintons’ third term, the economy will soar and this will be just the start. The good times will keep rolling in their fourth term as well and during the presidencies of their like-minded successors.
This time no bloated defense budgets, across the board tax cuts, or costly wars will cripple the markets after the Clintons leave office.
Following their departure from D.C., Democrats will retain control of the White House and the economy will continue to thrive as it did after FDR’s death in 1945. In all, the Obama recovery will last for at least two decades – until well into the 2020s and perhaps beyond, a period that will remind older Americans of the prosperous post-New Deal Era.
Jarmuth has published articles on The Hill, Washington Monthly, and Liberal Opinion Week and currently holds legal clinics for low income adults in a Seattle suburb.
The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.