Larger text
Smaller text
He couldn’t be president today
Salena Zito 
412-320-7879Political Reporter
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Salena Zito is a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review staff writer and a Trib editorial page columnist.
Contact Us | Video | RSS | Mobile
Daily Photo Galleries
By Salena Zito
Published: Saturday, November 10, 2012, 8:47 p.m.
Updated: Saturday, November 10, 2012
JUMONVILLE GLEN
For a handful of people, inspired reflection can come from standing where a pivotal moment in history occurred and wondering what our forebears would think about how we have carried on with what they started.
In 1754, in this small patch of Western Pennsylvania woods, a 22-year-old George Washington saw his first combat. He led his men, a group of scouts surveying land, in a 15-minute battle with the French that set in motion a chain of events leading to a world war and a colonial rebellion.
His actions changed the course of history in North America and the world.
Twenty-two years later, on a terribly cold December day, Washington — a man who preferred the life of a wealthy planter — stood along the Delaware River and assessed what faced him: His Continental Army had been badly mauled and driven out of New York City, Congress had been forced to flee Philadelphia, 1,600 of his soldiers were sick, the enlistments of many others would expire at month's end, and morale was low. Even subordinate officers had started to question his generalship.
Then he assessed what was at stake.
Washington's fear at that moment was that the revolution might collapse, according to Curt Nichols, a Baylor University expert on the first president.
“The heady excitement of July, when the young country declared its independence, seemed so long ago ... and America's future was fading away into the snow like the soldiers that were starting to desert his army,” he explained.
Washington knew he needed a victory, Nichols said. “So on Christmas night — with the weather getting progressively worse, turning from drizzle to rain to sleet and snow — Washington crossed the Delaware with about 2,400 troops to attack the Hessian troops serving under the British crown (and) encamped in Trenton.”
After marching through the night in hurricane-like winter weather, the Continental Army attacked and caught the Hessians unprepared. More than 100 Hessians were killed or wounded and 1,000 captured, with just three Americans killed and six wounded.
The dramatic American victory inspired rebels throughout the Colonies. With the success of the revolution in doubt a week earlier, the army had seemed near collapse; the battle of Trenton inspired soldiers to serve longer and attracted recruits.
Had Washington surrendered to despair in Jumonville or on the banks of the Delaware, who knows if our great little experiment in democracy would exist today.
One thing is certain, though: Had he run for president today, he would never have made it out of the primaries in either political party.
Today's elections are about math, not people — and certainly not about issues. They hinge on which candidate's team effectively wins over a type of voter. They also hinge on some 10 states, not all 50, and on “likability” — which candidate you'd prefer to drink a beer with.
Last Tuesday's exit polls showed our president to be lacking on critical issues, such as jobs and the economy. Yet everyone thought he was more likable than his opponent, and so he won.
George Washington would never pass today's likability test; he was aloof at best. Also one of the elite: He was arguably the country's richest man at a time when wealth was measured by the amount of land you owned, because his holdings stretched from Virginia to Mingo Junction in “Ohio Country.”
In his farewell address to the nation, Washington wisely warned of the division that political parties would create, saying: “They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests.”
Standing in the hollow where Washington fought his first battle, you have to wonder what he would think of the divisiveness and the class warfare that was fought to hold onto the presidency in our latest national election.
Salena Zito covers politics for Trib Total Media (412-320-7879 or szito@tribweb.com).
Most Popular Salena
You must be signed in to add comments
To comment, click the Sign in or sign up at the very top of this page.
George Washington and I don't have to wonder at what he would have thought about "divisiveness and class warfare" surrounding the fight for the presidency today or in his own era. George Washington was more than happy to leave office after dealing with derisive things said about him in opposition newspapers, like the Aurora. Of the Aurora, Washington wrote to Benjamin Walker on January 12,1797: " If you read the Aurora...you cannot but have perceived with what malignant industry and perceived falsehoods I am assailed in order to weaken, if not destroy, the confidence of the public." Editor Benjamin Franklin Bache would write in the 1796 Aurora: "If ever a nation was debauched by a man, the American nation has been debauched by Washington. If ever a nation was deceived by a man, the American nation has been deceived by Washington. Let his conduct, then, be an example to future ages; let it serve to be a warning that no man can be an idol." As to class warfare, Thomas Jefferson would write on behalf of his Republican Party against the Federalist Party in 1796: "An Anglican monarchial and aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over us the substance, as they have already done the forms, of the British government...It would give you a fever were I to name to you the apostates who have gone over to these heresies, men who were Samsons in the field and Solomons in the council." Washington was a Samson. "American Aurora" by Richard Rosenfeld will provide readers with more newspaper accounts of Washington's era. For the Federalist opposition press, read John Fenno and William Cobbett. Therein, you will find that divisiveness and class warfare were inherent in American politics from Day One. All the more wonder that there was compromise enough to formulate a Constitution and start up a Republic. But, compromise also involved apparently some distortions of history. Hence, you find Benjamin Rush writing to John Adams on Feb. 12, 1812: "At no time after the year 1777, did I believe him (Washington) to be 'the first in war.'...Were I to mention all that I have heard of his heart...it would appear that he was not possessed of all the divine attributes that have been ascribed to him." (The Spur of Fame, pp. 209-210.) To which Adams replies on March 19, 1812: "The great character (Washington) was a 'Character of Convention.' His first appointment was a magnanimous sacrifice of the north to the south, to the base jealousy, sordid envy, and ignorant prejudices of southern and middle states against New England." Former Secretary of State, Timothy Pickering would write on July 29, 1824 to James Robertson: "It was important to maintain, during the revolution, the popular opinion in (Washington's) favor. Accordingly, there was no public disclosure...These early impressions in favor of Washington remain on in the minds, generally of his surviving contemporary fellow-citizens, and have passed, naturally, into the minds of the succeeding generation. Hence, to question the reality of those imputed excellencies is deemed little short of treason. But is it proper that the truth should forever be concealed?" Bruce Braden Editor: Ye Will Say I Am No Christian: The Thomas Jefferson/John Adams Correspondence on Religion, Morals, and Values. Prometheus Books, 2005.
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.
