Progressive Party (United States, 1912) – Wikipedia, the …
The Progressive Party of 1912 was an American third party. It was formed by former President Theodore Roosevelt, after he lost the nomination of the Republican Party to his former protg, President William Howard Taft, who had since become his political adversary. The new party was known for taking advanced positions on progressive reforms, and attracting some leading reformers. However it ran a full ticket and Republican politicians and political activists across the country generally refused to join. California was the exception, for the progressive element took control of the Republican Party in that state, and ran its leader Hiram Johnson as Roosevelt's running mate. It carried only eight states, enabling Democrat Woodrow Wilson to score a massive landslide in the electoral college, as well as control of both houses of Congress. Beset by factionalism and failure to win many offices, the party went into rapid decline by 1914 and virtually disappeared in 1916. One main result was that conservative elements took control of the Republican Party for decades. The reforms proposed by the party had all been under discussion for years.
The Progressive party was nicknamed the Bull Moose Party after journalists quoted Roosevelt saying that he felt "fit as a bull moose" shortly after the new party was formed.[1]
Roosevelt left office in 1909. He had selected Taft, his Secretary of War, to succeed him as presidential candidate, and Taft easily won the 1908 presidential election. Roosevelt became disappointed by Taft's increasingly conservative policies. Taft upset Roosevelt when he used the Sherman Anti-Trust Act to sue U.S. Steel for an action that President Roosevelt had explicitly approved.[2] They became openly hostile, and Roosevelt decided to seek the presidency.
Roosevelt entered the campaign late, as Taft was already being challenged by progressive leader Senator Robert La Follette of Wisconsin. Most of La Follette's supporters switched to Roosevelt, leaving the Wisconsin Senator embittered.
Nine of the states where progressive elements were strongest had set up preference primaries, which Roosevelt won. But Taft had worked far harder than Roosevelt to control the Republican Party's organizational operations and the mechanism for choosing its presidential nominee, the 1912 Republican National Convention. For example he bought up the votes of delegates from the southern states, copying the technique Roosevelt himself used in 1904. The Republican national convention rejected Roosevelt's protests. Roosevelt and his supporters walked out, and the convention re-nominated Taft. The next day, Roosevelt supporters met to form a new political party of their own. California governor Hiram Johnson became its chairman, and a new convention was scheduled for August. Most of the funding came from to wealthy sponsors, magazine publisher Frank A. Munsey provided $135,000; George W. Perkins, a director of U.S. Steel and Chairman of the International Harvester Company gave $130,000 and became its executive secretary. Roosevelt's family gave $77,500 and others gave $164,000. The total was nearly $600,000, far less than the major parties.[3][4]
The new party had serious structural defects. Since it insisted on running complete tickets against the regular Republican ticket in most states, few Republican politicians were willing to support it. The exception was California, where the progressive element took control of the Republican Party and Taft was not even on the November ballot. Only 5 of the 15 more progressive Republican Senators declared support for it. Republican Representatives, governors, committeemen, and the publishers and editors of Republican-leaning newspapers showed comparable reluctance. Many of Roosevelt's closest political allies supported Taft, including his son-in-law, Nicholas Longworth (though Roosevelt's daughter Alice stuck with her father, causing a permanent chill in her marriage). For men like Longworth, expecting a future of his own in Republican politics, bolting the party would have seemed tantamount to career suicide.
However, many independent reformers still signed up.
Despite these obstacles, the August convention opened with great enthusiasm. Over 2,000 delegates attended, including many women. In 1912, neither Taft nor Wilson, endorsed women's suffrage on the national level.[5] The notable suffragist and social worker Jane Addams gave a seconding speech for Roosevelt's nomination. However, Roosevelt insisted on excluding black Republicans from the South (whom he regarded as a corrupt and ineffective element).[6] However Roosevelt further alienated white southern supporters on the eve of the election by publicly dining with black people at a Rhode Island hotel.[7][8]
Roosevelt was nominated by acclamation, with Johnson as his running mate.
The main work of the convention was the platform, which set forth the new party's appeal to the voters. It included a broad range of social and political reforms long advocated by progressives. It spoke with near-religious fervor, and the candidate himself promised, "Our cause is based on the eternal principle of righteousness; and even though we how now lead may for the time fail, in the end the cause itself shall triumph."[9]
The platform's main theme was reversing the domination of politics by business interests, which allegedly controlled the Republican and Democratic parties, alike. The platform asserted that:
To that end, the platform called for
In the social sphere the platform called for
The political reforms proposed included
The platform also urged states to adopt measures for "direct democracy", including:
Besides these measures, the platform called for reductions in the tariff, and limitations on naval armaments by international agreement.
The biggest controversy at the convention was over the platform section dealing with trusts and monopolies. The convention approved a strong "trust-busting" plank, but Perkins had it replaced with language that spoke only of "strong National regulation" and "permanent active [Federal] supervision" of major corporations. This retreat shocked reformers like Pinchot, who blamed it on Perkins. The result was a deep split in the new party that was never resolved.[12]
In general the platform expressed Roosevelt's "New Nationalism", An extension of his earlier philosophy of the Square Deal. He called for new restraints on the power of federal and state judges along with a strong executive to regulate industry, protect the working classes, and carry on great national projects. This New Nationalism was paternalistic, in direct contrast to Wilson's individualistic philosophy of "New Freedom". However one selected, Wilson's actual program resembled Roosevelt's ideas, apart from the notion of reining in judges.[13]
Roosevelt also favored a vigorous foreign policy, including strong military power. Though the platform called for limiting naval armaments, it also recommended the construction of two new battleships per year, much to the distress of outright pacifists such as Jane Addams.[14]
Roosevelt ran a vigorous campaign, but the campaign was short of money, as the business interests which had supported Roosevelt in 1904 either backed the other candidates or stayed neutral. Roosevelt was also handicapped because he had already served nearly two full terms as President, and thus was challenging the unwritten "no third term" rule.
In the end Roosevelt fell far short of winning. He drew 4.1 million votes27%, well behind Wilson's 42% but ahead of Taft's 23%. (6% went to Socialist Eugene Debs). He received 88 electoral votes, compared to 435 for Wilson and 8 for Taft.[15] This was nonetheless the best showing by any third party since the modern two-party system was established in 1864. Roosevelt was the only third-party candidate to outpoll a candidate of an established party.
Many historians have concluded that the Republican split was essential to allow Wilson to win the presidency. Others argue that even without the split, Wilson would have won (as he did in 1916).
In addition to Roosevelt's presidential campaign, hundreds of other candidates sought office as Progressives in 1912.
Twenty-one ran for governor. Over 200 ran for U.S. Representative (the exact number is not clear because there were many Republican-Progressive fusion candidacies, and some candidates ran with the labels of ad hoc groups such as "Bull Moose Republicans" or (in Pennsylvania) the "Washington Party".
On October 14, 1912, Theodore Roosevelt was shot in the chest in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and still delivered his 90-minute presidential campaign speech as planned. The would-be assassin, John Flammang Schrank, claimed the ghost of William McKinley had appeared to him in a dream and ordered him to avenge his death by killing Roosevelt. Had it not been for the 50-page speech and steel eyeglass case Roosevelt was carrying in his jacket, the bullet would have gone deeper into his chest and penetrated his lung. When asked if the shooting would affect his election campaign, he said to the reporter "I'm fit as a bull moose," which inspired the party's emblem.[16]
In California, the state Republican party was controlled by governor and Roosevelt ally Hiram Johnson, the Vice-Presidential nominee, so progressives there stayed with the Republican label (with one exception).
Most of the Progressive candidates were in New York, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Massachusetts. Only a few were in the South.
The lesser Progressive candidates generally got between 10% and 30% of the vote. Nine Progressives were elected to the House; none won governorships.[17]
Some historians speculate that if the Progressive Party had run only the Roosevelt presidential ticket, it might have attracted many more Republicans willing to split their ballot. But the progressive movement was strongest at the state level, and, so the new party had fielded candidates for governor and state legislature. In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the local Republican boss, at odds with state party leaders, joined Roosevelt's cause.
In spite of this, very few Progressives were elected to local offices; about 250. The Democrats gained many state legislature seats, which gave them 10 additional U.S. Senate seats; they also gained 63 U.S. House seats.
Despite the failure of 1912, the Progressive Party did not disappear at once. 138 candidates, including women,[18] ran for the U.S. House as Progressives in 1914, and 5 were elected. However, almost half the candidates failed to get more than 10% of the vote.[19]
Hiram Johnson was denied renomination for Governor as a Republican; he ran as a Progressive and was re-elected. Seven other Progressives ran for governor; none got more than 16%.[20] Some state parties remained fairly strong. In Washington, Progressives won a third of the seats in the Washington State Legislature.
Louisiana businessman John M. Parker ran for governor as a Progressive early in the year. (The Republican Party was deeply unpopular in Louisiana.) Parker got a respectable 37% of the vote. He was the only Progressive to run for governor that year.[21]
Later that year, the party held its second national convention, in conjunction with the Republican national convention. This was to facilitate a possible reconciliation. Five delegates from each convention met to negotiate. The Progressives wanted reunification with Roosevelt as nominee, which the Republicans adamantly opposed. Meanwhile, Charles Evans Hughes, a moderate progressive, became the front-runner at the Republican convention. He had been on the Supreme Court in 1912 and thus was completely neutral on the bitter debates that year. The Progressives suggested Hughes as a compromise candidate. Then Roosevelt sent a message proposing conservative Senator Henry Cabot Lodge. The shocked Progressives immediately nominated Roosevelt again, with Parker as the Vice Presidential nominee. Roosevelt refused to accept the nomination and endorsed Hughes, who was immediately approved by the Republican convention.[22]
The remnants of the national Progressive party promptly disintegrated. Most Progressives reverted to the Republican Party, including Roosevelt, who stumped for Hughes, and Hiram Johnson, who was elected to the Senate as a Republican. Some leaders, such as Harold Ickes of Chicago, supported Wilson.
All the remaining "Progressives" in Congress rejoined the Republican Party, except Martin, who became a Democrat. No candidates ran as Progressives for governor, Senator, or Representative.
From 1916 to 1932 the Taft wing controlled the Republican Party and refused to nominate any prominent 1912 Progressives to the Republican national ticket. Finally, Frank Knox was nominated for Vice President in 1936.
The relative domination of the Republican Party by conservatives left many former Progressives with no real affiliation till the 1930s, when most joined the New Deal Democratic Party coalition of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Robert M. La Follette, Sr. broke bitterly with Roosevelt in 1912, and ran for President on his own ticket, the 1924 Progressive Party, during the 1924 presidential election.
Read the original:
Progressive Party (United States, 1912) - Wikipedia, the ...
- Progressives Must Unite Against Nigel Farage and National Populism or Reform Will Win - Byline Times - July 6th, 2025 [July 6th, 2025]
- Progressives Disdain of Genius Is a Problem for the West - Bloomberg.com - July 6th, 2025 [July 6th, 2025]
- Mamdani electrified progressives in New York. In San Francisco, the left is full of envy. - Politico - July 4th, 2025 [July 4th, 2025]
- Minnesota progressives sound alarm over Trump tax bill - Minnesota Reformer - July 4th, 2025 [July 4th, 2025]
- Can Progressives Get Behind Parental Rights for All? - First Things - July 4th, 2025 [July 4th, 2025]
- Opinion | Your shampoo is locked up in stores, thanks to progressives - The Boston Globe - July 4th, 2025 [July 4th, 2025]
- Progressives trapped in 'misinformation bubble' about transgender youth treatments, Atlantic writer admits - Fox News - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Protecting the Rights of Parents from Progressives - Mosaic Magazine - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Catholic progressives and the development of sexual doctrine - Catholic World Report - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Why Zohran Mamdanis New York win does not really hold lessons for progressives across the world - Scroll.in - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Parents, not progressives, know their kids best. They should control education. | Opinion - Yahoo - July 2nd, 2025 [July 2nd, 2025]
- Gavin Newsom wont save California Progressives have damaged the state - UnHerd - June 29th, 2025 [June 29th, 2025]
- After Zohran Mamdanis upset, theres a way forward for pro-Israel progressives - The Forward - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Zohran Mamdanis victory should be a wake-up call to Canadian progressives - Ricochet Media - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Progressives tell Andrew Cuomo good riddance after Zohran Mamdanis shock victory in Democratic primary - the-independent.com - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Pennsylvania progressives turn back to former Fetterman foe as congressman spurns party line - Washington Examiner - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- After Zohran Mamdanis upset, theres a way forward for pro-Israel progressives - Jewish Telegraphic Agency - June 28th, 2025 [June 28th, 2025]
- Progressives Just Won Big in New York's Second-Largest City - Newsweek - June 26th, 2025 [June 26th, 2025]
- Big win in New York is a message for progressives. The Big Beautiful Bull further exposed. - Daily Kos - June 26th, 2025 [June 26th, 2025]
- How Cherry Hill progressives upset the Norcross machine - MSN - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Progressives and leftists must unite to save humanity from nuclear war - Granma - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- My conversation with a 'Third Way' Democrat: can progressives & centrists coexist in one party? - Daily Kos - June 24th, 2025 [June 24th, 2025]
- Politics | 2025 Was Supposed to Be a Big Year for RI Progressives at State House. It Is a Bust. - GoLocalProv - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Progressives Abandoned J. K. Rowling, Not the Other Way Around - National Review - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Inside the Cherry Hill political battle that pitted progressives against the Norcross machine - Inquirer.com - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Not Just Progressives: Over Half of Trump Voters Oppose US War on Iran - Common Dreams - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- Ras Baraka: Dont Count Out the Progressives - New Jersey Globe - June 20th, 2025 [June 20th, 2025]
- A new book explores why progressives made it impossible to build in America - Inquirer.com - June 10th, 2025 [June 10th, 2025]
- Opinion: Someone please send progressives the destination and ETA - Star Tribune - June 10th, 2025 [June 10th, 2025]
- New power in Riga? New Unity and Progressives seek common ground - Baltic News Network - June 10th, 2025 [June 10th, 2025]
- Republican Antitrust Officials Shouldnt Behave Like Progressives - The Daily Economy - June 10th, 2025 [June 10th, 2025]
- Why people follow religions, and why progressives should care. - Daily Kos - June 10th, 2025 [June 10th, 2025]
- Hakeem Jeffries agrees with Elon Musk. Progressives do not, nor should any Democrat or American. - Daily Kos - June 10th, 2025 [June 10th, 2025]
- House Progressives Block the Bombs Act Would End Transfer of Offensive Arms to Israel - Democracy Now! - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- The Billionaires Backing the Neoliberal 'Abundance Coachella' Gathering Draw Ire From Progressives - Common Dreams - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Revolution against Israel, US, and the West binds progressives to Iran - The Jerusalem Post - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- South Korean voters weary of political crisis are poised to return progressives to power - Le Monde.fr - June 7th, 2025 [June 7th, 2025]
- Video: Opinion | Progressives Are Driving Themselves Into Extinction - The New York Times - May 30th, 2025 [May 30th, 2025]
- Progressives anything but when it comes to Israel - Daily Herald - May 30th, 2025 [May 30th, 2025]
- How Progressives Are Unwittingly Aiding the Rise of Autocracy - Foreign Policy - May 11th, 2025 [May 11th, 2025]
- Progressives should care that the global population is set to fall - vox.com - May 11th, 2025 [May 11th, 2025]
- Progressives Mark Mother's Day With Calls to 'Honor Our Moms With Action' - Common Dreams - May 11th, 2025 [May 11th, 2025]
- Trump doesn't fear smart women. It's progressives who are really afraid. | Opinion - USA Today - May 11th, 2025 [May 11th, 2025]
- With Trump in the Mix, Progressives Are Winning the Intra Party Crypto War - notus.org - May 11th, 2025 [May 11th, 2025]
- Democrats and Progressives Won Widespread Victories Across Texas in Backlash against MAGA Extremism - Progress Texas - May 11th, 2025 [May 11th, 2025]
- The Progressives, The Conservatives, The Italians: Why This Conclave Is Different - Worldcrunch - May 11th, 2025 [May 11th, 2025]
- Newsoms back to needling progressives - Politico - May 2nd, 2025 [May 2nd, 2025]
- Opinion - The Supreme Courts immigration about-face has progressives all twisted up - Yahoo - May 2nd, 2025 [May 2nd, 2025]
- Are Progressives Coming Together in the South Bay ? Check Out "We The People South Bay" - LA Progressive - May 2nd, 2025 [May 2nd, 2025]
- The Risks Progressives Wont Discuss - The Times of Israel - May 2nd, 2025 [May 2nd, 2025]
- Watch: House progressives speak on first 100 days of Trumps second term - AOL.com - April 30th, 2025 [April 30th, 2025]
- City Politics: Who Will Win Progressives' Votes?; Upwardly Mobile Jobs; Anne Applebaum on Trump - WNYC - April 25th, 2025 [April 25th, 2025]
- National progressives back Houston attorney who fought GOP in court in Texas special election - The Hill - April 25th, 2025 [April 25th, 2025]
- SIMS: I Agree With The Progressives Hands Off! - NH Journal - April 25th, 2025 [April 25th, 2025]
- Progressives: Can Religious and Non Religious get along? - Daily Kos - April 25th, 2025 [April 25th, 2025]
- NYC progressives want to beat Adams and Cuomo. Can they set aside their differences? - Gothamist - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- Josue Sierra: When progressives turn their backs on women - Broad + Liberty - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- Why progressives failed the test of Oct 7 with Joshua Leifer - The Times of Israel - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- Maybe progressives shouldn't have supported a larger, more extensive federal government for 100 years - The Daily Review - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- Rich Lowry: Maybe progressives shouldnt have supported a larger, more extensive federal government for 100 years - Lewiston Sun Journal - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- Rich Lowry: Maybe progressives shouldn't have supported a larger, more extensive federal government for 100 years - The Joplin Globe - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- Kellyanne Conway rips progressives over Tesla protests: 'Trump derangement syndrome has reached stage five' - Fox Business - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- A Cohesive Message from Progressives - The New Yorker - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- The Left Has Turned White Progressives Into Hood Rats - AM 870 The ANSWER - April 1st, 2025 [April 1st, 2025]
- Progressives Are Pissed. This Group Wants Them to Run for Office - Rolling Stone - March 13th, 2025 [March 13th, 2025]
- AOC and other NY progressives call for Mahmoud Khalils release in letter to DHS - City & State New York - March 13th, 2025 [March 13th, 2025]
- Progressives are not demanding any special rights for anyone | Letters - Yahoo - March 13th, 2025 [March 13th, 2025]
- Californias Gavin Newsom opposes trans athletes in womens sports, splitting with progressives - MyMotherLode.com - March 11th, 2025 [March 11th, 2025]
- Progressives Gather In Concord to Protest, Well, Just About Everything - NH Journal - March 11th, 2025 [March 11th, 2025]
- Newsom deviates from progressives on womens sports issue - WORLD News Group - March 11th, 2025 [March 11th, 2025]
- California's Gavin Newsom opposes trans athletes in women's sports, splitting with progressives - Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal - March 11th, 2025 [March 11th, 2025]
- GV progressives organize against Trump - Green Valley News - March 11th, 2025 [March 11th, 2025]
- OPINION: Labor, progressives, and the politics of the West Side - 48 Hills - March 5th, 2025 [March 5th, 2025]
- Adriana E. Ramrez: Progressives should admit that Donald Trump might do something right - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - March 3rd, 2025 [March 3rd, 2025]
- Decades of pandering to progressives have left both BP and Unilever at a loss - The Telegraph - March 3rd, 2025 [March 3rd, 2025]
- Progressives tap a rising star to deliver their response to Trump - POLITICO - March 1st, 2025 [March 1st, 2025]
- Two Santa Ana progressives make bids for the 68th Assembly District - Los Angeles Times - March 1st, 2025 [March 1st, 2025]
- The great rethink and the opportunity for progressives - Nation.Cymru - March 1st, 2025 [March 1st, 2025]
- Progressives Say They Want Clean Energy. They Held Up This Hydro Project for Years. - POLITICO - February 25th, 2025 [February 25th, 2025]
- Meet the 'old-school Democrat' defying warped progressives to make his Southern city boom now Trump's back - Daily Mail - February 25th, 2025 [February 25th, 2025]