The “Just Folks” strategy aims to earn the support of the common man by displaying a rural upbringing, which Jackson and Lincoln both had, as well as being generally anti-higher education; Jackson had little education and Lincoln none at all, save for what he taught himself (Lordan). As described, both campaigns made extensive use of the strategy, emphasizing Jackson’s status as a military man from the frontier and Lincoln’s as a humble rail-splitter. In addition to their similar strategies, both candidates’ campaign teams were intelligent in their approach. Jackson’s supporters were pioneers of political strategies used today, including their use of the newspapers and songs/puns to spread their message, the media event of Jackson returning to New Orleans, and the smear tactics used against Adams. Lincoln’s campaign team was intelligent in an arguably more deceiving way, printing counterfeit admission passes to fill the convention with Lincoln men and bargaining with corrupt politicians to glean votes from the necessary delegates, though still as brilliant as the Jackson team. However, when it boils down to numbers, Jackson had the more successful campaign. He earned sixty-eight percent of the electoral vote (“Miscellaneous, the Presidency” 200) and fifty-six percent of the popular vote (Parsons 181), compared to Lincoln’s fifty-nine percent of the electoral vote and forty percent of the popular vote (“1860 Presidential Election Results”). The political climates of both elections were quite different, since in 1828 slavery was not a dire issue (Parsons page), and Jackson, having been born in the south, had tremendous support in the region. Thirty-two years later, when Lincoln ran for president, slavery was the defining issue of the campaign, and he
The “Just Folks” strategy aims to earn the support of the common man by displaying a rural upbringing, which Jackson and Lincoln both had, as well as being generally anti-higher education; Jackson had little education and Lincoln none at all, save for what he taught himself (Lordan). As described, both campaigns made extensive use of the strategy, emphasizing Jackson’s status as a military man from the frontier and Lincoln’s as a humble rail-splitter. In addition to their similar strategies, both candidates’ campaign teams were intelligent in their approach. Jackson’s supporters were pioneers of political strategies used today, including their use of the newspapers and songs/puns to spread their message, the media event of Jackson returning to New Orleans, and the smear tactics used against Adams. Lincoln’s campaign team was intelligent in an arguably more deceiving way, printing counterfeit admission passes to fill the convention with Lincoln men and bargaining with corrupt politicians to glean votes from the necessary delegates, though still as brilliant as the Jackson team. However, when it boils down to numbers, Jackson had the more successful campaign. He earned sixty-eight percent of the electoral vote (“Miscellaneous, the Presidency” 200) and fifty-six percent of the popular vote (Parsons 181), compared to Lincoln’s fifty-nine percent of the electoral vote and forty percent of the popular vote (“1860 Presidential Election Results”). The political climates of both elections were quite different, since in 1828 slavery was not a dire issue (Parsons page), and Jackson, having been born in the south, had tremendous support in the region. Thirty-two years later, when Lincoln ran for president, slavery was the defining issue of the campaign, and he