Americans Elected a Trusted General and the Appeal of Solid Leadership

The Presidential Election of 1956

Michael Streich

First published 2009 in Suite 101

The state of the world was very different in 1956, eleven years after the end of World War II. The Soviet Union and the United States had emerged as the new global superpowers, each attempting to influence the many under-developed nations where the forces of Democracy and Communism were contending to win the hearts and minds of the people. Dwight Eisenhower’s landslide victory in the election of 1956 demonstrated that although Americans elected a Democrat dominated Congress, they were unwilling to change presidents in the face of global conflicts that had the potential to turn into a nuclear war.

 

The Image of a Trusted General in a Time of Crisis

 

On paper, Eisenhower was not the best candidate. At 66 in 1956, he was still recovering from an earlier heart attack. Both houses of Congress were led by the Democrats who would have enacted many of the social reforms promoted by “Ike’s” opponent, Adali E. Stevenson. The only significant legislation associated with his first administration was passage of the Interstate Highway Act.

 

But President Eisenhower presided over a budget surplus and led the nation during a period of widespread prosperity and increased consumerism. Major businesses were growing, often through lucrative federal contracts. Above all, Eisenhower conveyed security and trust. Eisenhower had led Allied forces to victory in Europe, had served as the Supreme Commander of the newly formed NATO alliance, and had traveled to Korea to end that conflict.

 

Foreign Crises Challenge Eisenhower in 1956

 

Prior to the November election, two foreign crises tested the Eisenhower administration. In Egypt, President Nasser seized the Suez Canal, precipitating a crisis that included British and French military intervention as well as a simultaneous attack by the young state of Israel. Soviet Russia and the United States responded aggressively to the Suez Crisis, speaking with one voice. The belligerent parties were forced to withdraw from Egypt.

 

The Suez Crisis resulted in a weakened alliance with Britain and France, something Adali Stevenson criticized. But both Eisenhower and Stalin were realists in the complicated game of global chess and knew that European actions were driven more by colonial interests than egalitarian concerns. The Middle East, with its rich oil reserves, would become the primary battleground between the superpowers for alliances and commercial treaties. In this, supporting the sovereignty of Egypt was highly favored.

 

At the same time an uprising in Hungary against Soviet domination led to the false assumption that the Eisenhower administration’s talk of “liberation” would somehow guarantee Hungarian freedom. Eisenhower was not willing to risk war over Hungary as the brutal Soviet response resulted in many deaths. Americans understood this. But they also supported Eisenhower’s strong response to the Suez Crisis.

 

The Landslide Election of 1956

 

It had been obvious for many months that Eisenhower would easily win reelection. His campaigning was scaled back as Vice President Nixon took to the road to speak to the crowds. In the end, Eisenhower won reelection with 57.4% of the vote. Voters, however, differentiated between the trusted general and the Republican Party; Democrats continued to control the Congress.

 

Sources:

 

Stephen E. Ambrose and Douglas G. Brinkley, Rise to Globalism: American Foreign Policy Since 1938 (Penguin Books, 1997)

Paul F. Boller, Jr., Presidential Campaigns From George Washington to George W. Bush (Oxford University Press, 2004)

William A. DeGregorio, The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents From George Washington to George W. Bush (New York: Gramercy Books, 2001)

*Copyright of this article is owned by Michael Streich. Reprinting this article in any form must be granted permission in writing by the author.