Campaign Trail Results: Game #721626

This Game:

  • Year: 1896
  • Player Candidate: William McKinley
  • Running Mate: Garret Hobart
  • Difficulty Level: Normal
  • Winner Take All Mode?: Yes
  • Game Played:
  • mdumanis
Previous Game Next Game
View overall results, or a specific state:
CandidateElectoral VotesPopular VotesPop. Vote %
---- William McKinley2777,366,46652.49
---- William Jennings Bryan1706,526,86346.50
---- John Palmer0141,7811.01

Answers:

  • Do you have any comments to make about the candidacy of John Palmer, a Gold Democrat and splinter candidate who is currently campaigning?
    Good riddance. On the issue of silver coinage, you are either with us or you're with the industrialists. Palmer has shown his cards.
  • Which of the following will be your primary campaign message?
    My administration will bring back the era of the budget surplus, and will work towards the professionalization of the federal government. We will continue to phase out the 'spoils system' in accordance with the Pendleton Act.
  • What points do you wish to touch upon as you accept the Republican nomination? A written transcript will be transmitted to voters across the country.
    William Jennings Bryan makes an eloquent appeal to the heart. It's important for voters to realize that his solutions will not help our country.
  • Bryan's nomination has electrified the western voter, and he is now planning to campaign on the rails, six days a week. Will you break precedent as well and make a speaking tour of the nation?
    There's no way I can compete with Bryan's oratorical talents. Instead, I will receive groups of visitors at my home in Canton, Ohio. We have the financing to pay for these visits, and anyone who shows up will receive a free sandwich while I deliver a speech.
  • You have the support of the important newspapers, and they are willing to accept your guidance on the proper campaign message. What do you want them to print?
    The big newspapers should remind the voters that I represent a return to prosperity after the Democratic disaster of the previous four years. They should be paying as little attention to Bryan as possible.
  • Your surrogates have taken to reminding some workers that factories and railroads will certainly be forced to close if a radical like Bryan takes office. Do you encourage such tactics?
    Bryan and his minions are no doubt threatening the American farmer with foreclosure and penury if I'm elected. Politics is politics and I don't see a problem.
  • As a Congressman, you voted for the Sherman Silver Purchase Act in 1890. Can you reassure your supporters that you are now 100% in favor of the gold standard.
    Since 1890 the folly of a silver purchase program has become clear. Our Treasury was nearly bankrupted in 1894 and I won't allow this to happen a second time.
  • The West Coast is a very competitive region. Can you make the case for Republican policies there, particularly in those places such as San Francisco which rely on foreign trade?
    Bryan is the type of do-gooder politician who would attempt to impose his own morality on this independent region.
  • Some of the border states (Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky) are very close this year. Do you have a strategy to make these states jump to the Republican side?
    There is a burgeoning textile industry in the Upper South. Their success depends on cheap cotton, protection, and an absence of destabilizing labor issues.
  • Will you send campaigners to Nebraska, in an attempt to deliver an embarrassing defeat to Bryan, or should those resources be focused on South Dakota, Wyoming, and Iowa?
    We are running a 45-state strategy. I want our victory and repudiation of the silver Democrats to be as large as possible.
  • The railroads have agreed to transport any interested voters to Canton, Ohio to meet you at a cut-rate cost. Of course, they only ask that you maintain the traditional Republican policy of amity and good-will towards their business practices. Are you willing to make this commitment?
    The Republican Party has always been the party of the railroads. We will defend them from any misguided regulation that may arise.
  • There is one week left until election day. Every state is important, but where will you give an extra push with what is left of your financial resources to educate the American voters?
    Let's take the fight to Bryan. I want us to be campaigning the hardest in Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, and Iowa. Our extra cash will ensure a landslide on election night.
  • Can you state your definitive position on the American monetary system?
    I support a strict adherence to the gold standard, which is fundamental to American prosperity.
  • What is your definitive position on the tariff issue?
    Where we have mature, stable industries, tariffs can be lower. They should be high on most products.
  • The United States is in the midst of a financial calamity, with masses of unemployed men on the streets. What will you do to revive business in this country?
    We need to reaffirm our commitment to non-intervention in business affairs. Companies need stability before they will have the confidence to expand.
  • Grover Cleveland sent federal troops to Illinois to end the Pullman Strike without the request of Governor Altgeld. Was this an overreach on his part?
    It's not the job of government to regulate labor disputes, but the fact of the matter is that these strikers were allowing no rail traffic to pass through Chicago whatsoever. Something needed to be done.
  • What is your opinion on measures that would aim to restrict the sale or production of alcohol?
    Perhaps if our goal is to prevent drinking on Sunday, or public drunkenness, I am all for those measures. But a blanket temperance law is a different story.
  • The Dependent Pension Act of 1890 greatly expended the the pension system for Union Army veterans. What are your thoughts on this act?
    These are men who served honorably in our nation's greatest time of need. I will never allow agitators to attack their honorably granted pensions.
  • The federal deficit has recently increased after two decades of steady decline. What are your thoughts on this?
    Once we reinstitute our tariffs, this deficit will disappear. Best of all, the lion's share of these taxes will be paid by foreign merchants.
  • Would you support a program to compensate workers who are injured on the job? Is this a proper responsibility of the federal government?
    This is more properly a state responsibility. It is outside the scope of the federal government to regulate working conditions in this manner.
  • What are your thoughts on the Women's Christian Temperance Union? Is this group a positive force in American life?
    This is a well-meaning group of honest Christian women. I am neither especially opposed to nor especially supportive of their goals.
  • Some people have suggested implementing a minimum wage, under which people may not be employed. Do you think this would help increase wages or would it simply put more men out of work?
    This policy is economically unviable. It is also yet another "solution" to our problems which I deem to be unconstitutional.
  • In Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co. the Supreme Court ruled that a 2% income tax contained in the Wilson-Gorman Tariff was unconstitutional. Would you support a Constitutional Amendment allowing the federal government to collect an income tax?
    Good for the Supreme Court for taking a firm, principled stand on this issue. Increased tariffs will be more than sufficient to cover the funding needs of our federal government.
  • Should corporations be permitted to hire private detectives for security, and to infiltrate into labor movements?
    I don't see who has the authority to stop this. This is another example of regulation that would fall outside of the scope of the Commerce Clause in the Constitution.
  • Do you believe that the federal government has any right to issue interest-bearing bonds, such as those sold to J.P. Morgan in 1895?
    The federal government has every right to issue interest bearing bonds. Of course, under a solvent Administration there would be no cause for doing so. This whole episode reflects more poorly on the performance of President Cleveland than it does on any great legal issue.