The election of 2024 could be a replay of 1844

The election of 2024 could be a replay of 1844

Davy Crockett (center), lifting his famous rifle Betsy, tries to beat off the Mexican troop outside the Alamo on March 6th, 1836. He was one of the 187 men who held the fortified San Antonia mission for 11 days against Santa Anna’s army of 3,000, but finally he and all the other defenders were dead. The painting is by the 19th-century Texan, Robert Onderdunk, War With Mexico (The American Heritage New Illustrated History of the United States, Volume 7) Hardcover – January 1, 1963) [David Kramer’s collection] From The 180th Anniversary of the Alamo and Trump’s Wall with Dr. Josue Ramirez

Trump has not even conceded but pundits are already looking forward to 2024, especially if Trumps runs for the Republican nomination. Playing the tantalizing and frustrating game of political prognostication in which elections are framed in terms of their predecessors, I nominate 1844 as the precursor to 2024.

As a defeated president running for an elongated re-election, Trump would like to be Grover Cleveland. As the sitting president Cleveland lost a close race to Benjamin Harrison in 1888, but regained the presidency in 1892.

By comparison, Trump does not want to be Herbert Hoover, a one term president. Hoover lost decidedly to Roosevelt in 1932 but continued to be vocal in his objections to the New Deal, and sought the presidency again in 1940.

Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, 19 Oct 1920, Tue, Page 20. From  Herbert Hoover finally found in Rochester

In 1940, although Hoover fared poorly in the primaries, he pursued the Republican nomination all the way to the Convention, but on the first ballot only received 17 first place votes. At the Convention, Hoover offered a sparkling tribute to the Republican nominee, Wendell Willkie.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch 26 Jun 1940 See Herbert Hoover finally found in Rochester

I selected 1844 as the precursor to 2024 because in the elections of 1840 and 1844, the annexation of the Republic of Texas was a critical issue. Likewise, concerns over southern border security dominated Trump’s 2016 campaign — “Build the Wall” — continuing as theme throughout Trump’s presidency.  Like 2024 if Trump runs, 1844 featured a defeated, one term president who tried to re-win the presidency.¹

In 1836, the Republic of Texas declared its independence from Mexico. That same year, then-Vice President Democrat Martin Van Buren was elected president. Southern pro-slavery Democrats wanted Van Buren to push for Mexican annexation, but Van Buren resisted. Van Buren’s anti-annexation stance contributed to his defeat in 1840 by William Henry Harrison.

During the Harrison/Tyler administration, Van Buren remained popular in his party, and he chose to run again in 1844. Again, Van Buren’s rejection of Texas annexation damaged him with Southern pro-slavery Democrats. Van Buren actually was the favorite entering the Democratic Convention, but lacked the necessary two thirds of the vote. Ultimately, James Polk was the nominee, later defeating the Whig Henry Clay.

Texas was annexed by the United States on December 29, 1845 and admitted to the Union as the 28th state on that day. Texas annexation was a trigger for the Mexican–American War (1846–1848).  In the election of 1848, Van Buren ran unsuccessfully as the third-party Free Soil candidate.

In my scenario, already having declared his candidacy for 2024, at a strategically chosen point in the Biden presidency, Trump begins an aggressive attack on the administration’s Mexican border policy and the “open border radical left Democrats.” Trump’s attacks energize his still loyal base.

At some point, with the approval of his base, Trumps floats a conspiracy theory that Biden — with the help of George Soros — is colluding with the Mexican government to overwhelm border security and flood the United States with illegal immigrants. Trump says the only solution is to remove Biden and to annex some of Mexico’s border territory to punish its government and further shore up the Wall. Trump’s rallying cry is: “Impeach and Invade.”

With Jessica Rowe on Scottsville Road near the airport at Trumps’ April 10th, 2016 campaign stop. From The electoral year in review. Getting Trumped.

As the primaries begin, what’s left of the Republican establishment grows skittish. Just as Van Buren’s resistance to annexing Texas proved to be an electoral loser, the Republican party fears invading Mexico will also be an electoral failure. Trump just doesn’t have the numbers to win.

In a brilliant and successful sales pitch, Republican leaders convince Trump to hand over the reins to a younger man, Texas Senator Ted Cruz. Although Cruz tones down Trump’s annexation rhetoric, he promises Trump he will strongly carry the mantle of anti-immigration, and offers Trump a position in a Cruz administration.

As Polk won in 1844 — returning the presidency to the Democrats — so too Cruz wins (over Kamala Harris) in 2024, returning the presidency to the Republicans. In 2026, the second Mexican-American War commences.²


¹ Other former presidents also sought presidential re-election. In 1856, former president Milliard Fillmore was the Know Nothing Party candidate, winning Maryland. In 1880, former President Ulysses S. Grant unsuccessfully campaigned to be the Republican Party candidate. In 1912, former president Theodore Roosevelt was the Progressive Party nominee, winning 88 electoral votes. My focus, however, is on defeated presidents who sought another term four or eight years later: Hoover, Cleveland and Van Buren.

²Reader and contributor John Roche comments:

Well, that’s a dire prediction, David, but a very interesting historical analogy. I personally don’t believe Trump will be alive in two years, or else will be so physically and mentally degraded he won’t be fit to campaign. And there’s a 50-50 chance he’ll be serving his next term in Sing Sing.

As for Cruz, he’s much detested even by fellow Republicans. I don’t see him getting much traction beyond Texas and Florida. Now a Beto vs. Cruz re-match, for the Presidency, could get interesting!


The 180th Anniversary of the Alamo and Trump’s Wall with Dr. Josue Ramirez

Martin Van Buren: The Little Magician pops up in Rochester


About The Author

Welcome to Talker of the Town! My name is David Kramer. I have a Ph.D in English and teach at Keuka College. I am a former and still active Fellow at the Nazareth College Center for Public History and a Storyteller in Residence at the SmallMatters Institute. Over the years, I have taught at Monroe Community College, the Rochester Institute of Technology and St. John Fisher College. I have published numerous Guest Essays, Letters, Book Reviews and Opinion pieces in The New York Times, Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, the Buffalo News, the Rochester Patriot, the Providence Journal, the Providence Business News, the Brown Alumni Magazine, the New London Day, the Boston Herald, the Messenger Post Newspapers, the Wedge, the Empty Closet, the CITY, Lake Affect Magazine and Brighton Connections. My poetry appears in The Criterion: An International Journal in English and Rundenalia and my academic writing in War, Literature and the Arts and Twentieth Century Literary Criticism. Starting in February 2013, I wrote for three Democratic and Chronicle  blogs, "Make City Schools Better," "Unite Rochester," and the "Editorial Board." When my tenure at the D & C  ended, I wanted to continue conversations first begun there. And start new ones.  So we created this new space, Talker of the Town, where all are invited to join. I don’t like to say these posts are “mine.” Very few of them are the sole product of my sometimes overheated imagination. Instead, I call them partnerships and collaborations. Or as they say in education, “peer group work.” Talker of the Town might better be Talkers of the Town. The blog won’t thrive without your leads, text, pictures, ideas, facebook shares, tweets, comments and criticisms.

1 Comment

  1. Michael Nighan

    I’m assuming/hopeful that Trump’s obvious neurological and psychological problems (or perhaps a lengthy term of incarceration?) will sideline him long before 2024 rolls around. That being the case, the question becomes will he anoint a successor for his 70,000,000+ Deplorables to support? While the odds weigh heavily for him attempting to establish a dynasty by putting forward one of his Neanderthalic spawn, perhaps he’ll surprise us by taking the Alexander the Great approach. (On his death bed, Alexander was asked who he would leave his empire to. His response was, “to the strongest”.)

    That aside, I wouldn’t have included a picture glorifying the defenders of the Alamo. Contrary to popular history, the “freedoms” that they were fighting for included the freedom to own slaves.

    Not taught in American schools is the fact that in 1829 the then-dictator of Mexico, Vicente Ramón Guerrero Saldaña (himself of African descent) abolished slavery in all Mexican territories, which included Coahuila y Tejas (Texas). This move helped to antagonize the American settlers who had previously brought their slaves with them. After the Texas Revolution, including the siege of the Alamo in 1836, the constitution of the new Republic of Texas not only legalized slavery, but prohibited the Texas legislature from abolishing slavery in the future or interfering with the practice in any way. Further, a slave owner wishing to emancipate a slave would have to obtain permission from the legislature, and the freed slave was likewise required to petition the legislative for approval to remain in Texas. Lastly, Blacks and Native Americans were deemed to have no rights under the law.

    So much for the image of freedom-loving patriots fighting for their rights at the Alamo as portrayed by Hollywood.


Like what you see on our site? We’d appreciate your support. Please donate today.

Featured Posts