Episode #231 - Why President McKinley? (Part II)

July 1, 2025·1 hr 16 min·5 clips

A political cartoon depicted McKinley as tiny property of syndicates, sparking debate over his independence.

King or kingmaker? The host uses that question to get at the odd tension in the McKinley story: public power on one side, backroom influence on the other. Neither option gets dressed up as heroic. The host even stops to say that wanting neither crown nor control may be the healthier answer, then gets back to the politics, where ambition is just part of the air. McKinley's legacy depends on how much he led and how much powerful supporters pushed him along. Then the party bosses enter the picture. The Republican bosses are described as connected Northeastern politicians who could bring delegates and expect policy influence or appointments in return. McKinley did not cave. With Hanna reading the field and McKinley's popularity doing real work, the campaign saw a way to win the nomination without the usual dealmaking. The slogan did its job. The people versus the bosses sounded like reform, but the host is careful about the target. McKinley was not attacking the bosses of industry. Hal Williams helps sharpen that point: McKinley believed in industrialism, central authority, and expansive capitalism. That is what makes the move interesting. He could appeal to workers and small farmers while staying loyal to expansive capitalism. Not populism, really. More like a sharp campaign trick, letting exploited audiences hear reform without asking McKinley to become a reformer. The bosses lost anyway. By the 1896 Republican convention in St. Louis, McKinley had the nomination locked up, even with depression making the general election look rougher.

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from Our Fake History