These men both had good ideas and tried hard to help the United States be the best it can be. Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson had a few of the same ideas in their democracy. Each mans attitude toward the Bank of the United States was that they both strongly opposed it. They also both believed that women were not equal to men. These are the view things that Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson had the same beliefs on.
Jacksonian democrats were only guardians of political democracy, individual liberty and equality of economic opportunity, and the United States Constitution when it benefitted them. They were inconsistent in their handlings of these political notions. Voting in the elections during the 1820s to 1840 was more popular than ever. After the financial panic of 1819 white males without land demanded that they have suffrage and the ability to hold office; they were granted in the era of the Jacksonian Democracy (PK). White men now had universal manhood suffrage.
As shown by Documents C and G, Jackson overstepped his Constitutional bounds in each of situation, that of the closure of the Second Bank of America, and that of the Indian Removal. If, as in Documents A and F, a particular section of society needs to fight against the majority, the Constitution, which is designed to provide for public happiness, is being somewhat ignored or misused. Another idea we’ll consider is that they were champions of political democracy. This is a two-sided issue. As compared to their predecessors and contemporaries, they were most certainly the more democratic party.
This lack of democracy and in many cases, violence, towards the mentioned groups leads me to the overall conclusion that whilst Jackson may have attempted and possibly succeeded in democratising politics, at the same time he failed to democratise American society. Andrew Jackson can be seen to have democratised American politics from the moment he was first elected due to his image as the “Common man”. Having risen from poverty in the South with very limited formal education, Jackson was the first President to appeal and to represent the interests of the non-landed classes like the traditional Southern states where he grew up. Because this was so new a concept, voters were given the opportunity to make a decision: to either support Jackson’s non-autocratic views or to disagree with them. This was the first time in American history that voters were given such choice due to difference of opinion of the two candidates, leading to the development of the two-party system.
Jacksonian Democracy and Jeffersonian Democracy are both different forms of government between the 1800s and the 1840s that were based on the ideas of U.S. presidents Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson. But there ideas on leading the country were quite alike. Each man that defended the Jeffersonian democracy expressed views in their speeches and debates reflect those who defended the Jacksonian democracy. Also, each democracy had a different philosophy on controlling the country then the other. But the basics of their philosophies were the same.
The Democrats are less extreme versions of Liberals, and the Republicans are the less extreme version of the Socialist. The Democrats wants the government to be involved with the people life. They want to spend money on the people, and they want to govern them as much as possible. The Republicans on the other hand, do not want the government to be in the lives of the people. They want as little government as possible.
The stark diffrences between the two parties lead the the demise of the Federalist Parties and the rise of the Democratic Republicans. The Federalist and the Democratic Republicans have many different views on how they believe the government should be and how it should be set up. The federalists lead by Alexander Hamilton believed that the United States should create the first national bank, to help fund the nations debt from the war and to establish a states government and not a central government , but the Democratic Republicans believed it was against the constitution to establish a national bank, the Democratic Republicans also believed that a strong central government should be established instead of a states government, and with this one currency instead of one for every state. The Federalists also believed that a protective Tariff should be put in place to shield infant industries, the Federalist also believed in commercial trade throughout the sea ports to other countries. The Democratic Republicans on the other hand believed that no special tariff should be put on the manufacturers, and didn't believe in commercial trade they believed in agriculture.
Because some populations are so high in certain areas, a large amount of the representatives elected to the House, anti-federalists feared, would be only the prominent and wealthy men of the area. This meant that even more power would be given to the government with the titles the men already had before being elected. Not only did the power of the government make the anti-federalists nervous, the lack of a bill of rights kept them agreeing with the constitution. They wanted a set rights guaranteed so that the central government didn’t have all the power that the anti-federalists were afraid of. The anti-federalist’s opposition to the constitution was
This defeat was not a normal defeat as it is known as the “stolen election”. It is referred as this because Jackson won a huge amount of votes but unfortunately he did not have the electoral votes he needed to gain presidency. This meant that now the House of Representatives would be deciding the faith of the election. The outcome of this election was defeat for Jackson however as previously mentioned Jackson was victorious in the 1828 elections winning the majority of the votes and beating Adams. Jackson was quite unlike any other president of the United States.
The following essay will discuss these issues in detail plus other factors such as the leaderships on both sides and the aid of foreign support. The leadership of both parties is an important factor to consider why the civil war turned out the way it did. Many historians argue that Abraham Lincoln was a far better leader than his opposite counterpart Jefferson Davis. The Vice president of the Confederate, Alexander Stephens, had described Jefferson as being ‘weak, timid, petulant, peerish and obstinate’[1]. He also blamed Davis for ‘all that went wrong’ [2]during the war.