More on Adams vs. Jefferson

About half the book deals with events leading up to the election of 1800. The personalities that played a part, the relationship between Adams and Jefferson, getting the new national system (the Constitution) up and running, the last few years of Washington’s second term, the election of 1796, and “the partisan inferno” preceeding the mid-term elections in 1798.

The rest of the book deals with the election and the last chapter is the epilogue entitled “The Revolution of 1800.”

A couple more quotes from the book,

Both parties engaged in what now would be termed negative campaigning, an assault on their adversary’s program and leadership rather than an emphasis on their own platform. Federalists, for instance, left no stone unturned in their attempts to link the Republicans with the bloody excesses of the French Revolution. Jefferson and his adherents, they charged, embraced the same “cant of jacobinical illiberality” as their radical friends in France;… (page 151)

Is this what Burkee and Walz refer to in their Pact (fixed the link, my apologies)? How about this?

Jefferson was subjected to ceaseless obloquy. As a young attorney he was said to have gulled his clients. His wartime conduct after 1776 had been deplorable. While others sacrificed, he had lived comfortably, “secure in his retreat . . . from the fangs of a blood-thirsty foe.” Or so he had thought. When the enemy approached Monticello in 1781, he had run like a jack-rabbit, abandoning his post as governor in the great emergency.

And that’s not all. The founding fathers seem to be a lot more like candidates today, it seems.

In conclusion, the election of 1800 was a pivotal point in American history. Jefferson and Adams were adversaries during a passionate decade. Politics is a full contact sport and anyone entering should know that in advance.