Within the past week, the landscape of the 2024 presidential election has once again shifted. Just as the Democratic National Convention (DNC) came to an end third-party candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. suspended his campaign, throwing his support behind Trump. This week in class we learned about the scale of the presidency, campaigns as a democratic institution, David Axelrod, and the history of political parties, all of which were incredibly timely and reinforced to a group of 1,100 students in a class about the election, that elections are important.
Meacham opened Tuesday’s class by placing the power of the presidency within a historical context. He challenged the common view that “the imperial presidency is a post-FDR post-World War II creation. Until World War II, the president was one player in the symphony of American politics.” Instead, he asserts that the presidency has always been an object of desire, thus an object people have schemed to achieve. Citing Jefferson’s acts for the Louisiana Purchase, Meacham calls students to “remember that there was a moment that the entire landscape of a country was when a US president was willing to abandon his existing view to do something practical and expand the powers of the president.” This, Meacham explained, set a precedent that later presidents, including Lincoln, Roosevelt, and FDR, would draw upon—not necessarily in what they did, but in how they wielded their authority as president. He underscored that while the presidency has historically been a role where its occupants seek to increase their power, the true hero, according to Meacham, is the president who voluntarily relinquishes it. Though he only explicitly mentioned Washington, the implication of his words was unmistakably broader.
After Meacham, Geer took the mic and pushed to define and distinguish election campaigns as a fundamentally democratic institution. Throughout the lifespan of a campaign, whether it ends on November 5th or gets suspended before, “Candidates make their case to the public,” and at the end “the public renders a decision on which candidate/party they prefer.” Despite their importance, Geer acknowledged that campaigns are often unpopular. They’re perceived as too lengthy and overly negative. However, he pointed out a "simple, structural reason for negativity in a two-candidate race," explaining that there are four possible voting options: for Trump, against Trump, against Harris, and for Harris. With RFK now out of the race, this dynamic has become even more pronounced.
Hemmer rounded out Tuesday’s class by giving a compelling history of David Axelrod and his impact on the Obama campaign. As the chief strategist for Obama in 2008, Axelrod didn’t just position Obama as a presidential candidate; he transformed him into the leader of a movement. Axelrod also revolutionized the landscape of presidential campaigns by integrating social media and online fundraising—tools that are now indispensable in modern politics. Hemmer’s lecture served as a fitting prelude to Axelrod’s visit to Vanderbilt’s campus later that day, where he offered insights into the challenges facing the Harris campaign. Despite Harris’s strong showing at the DNC, her accelerated campaign timeline makes it difficult for voters to see her fully tested as a candidate. Hemmer reminded the class that the DNC has historically had the power to shift public opinion—just as Obama catapulted himself to political stardom in 2004 with his unifying speech during a time of intense political polarization. In reflecting on Axelrod's legacy and Harris's current challenges, Hemmer highlighted the enduring impact of campaign strategy on both candidates and the broader democratic process.
Lastly, Thursday’s class centered around parties…the really fun ones…political parties! Hemmer and Clinton covered a lot of ground on parties, from historical and contemporary contexts, to lay the groundwork for the impact parties have on our elections today. By many, they are seen as a source of negativity in American politics, but it is impossible to discuss the US government without discussing parties. Our electoral system naturally encourages a two-party structure, even though the Constitution doesn’t mandate it. While third parties, like RFK’s recent campaign, have made attempts to break through, they’ve consistently struggled to gain a foothold in presidential elections. Despite no longer controlling ballots directly, political parties still wield significant power in getting candidates elected. As voters prepare to cast their ballots, the outcome could profoundly affect the future of both parties. A Trump victory would cement his dominance over the Republican Party, which would likely spark internal conflict within the Democratic Party over its direction. On the other hand, a Harris victory would keep the Democratic Party focused on pragmatism to secure a second term, while the GOP might face an internal battle between those prioritizing electoral success and those committed to ideological purity. Ultimately, this election will not only determine the next president but also shape the evolution of America’s political parties.
There is a lot of noise surrounding the 2024 election, but in Meacham’s philosophy, we must reflect on who we want to have the nuclear codes and who we believe will do the right thing at least half the time. As campaigns become ever more negative and the president remains the most central figure in US politics, a voter's decision on election day is powerful. It is tough to overestimate the power of the president, thus in our conversations about who to hand over this power to, we must have "a full appreciation of the power and the perils of the character of this president," Meacham urges, "that is why elections are so important."
Comments