In the late 1700s or the early 1800s Thomas Jefferson stated, “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
By the late 1800s to the early 1900s, George Bernard Shaw had a somewhat different perspective when he said, “The problem we face today is that the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.”
I was talking with a friend earlier today about voting. We discussed that the problem today is perhaps that people who vote are usually not informed of the issues, but choose who is the most attractive or likeable.
In the earlier days of our country, the farther removed elections were from the local population, the less likely the chance that the candidates were well known. When Lincoln ran for president, there were many across the nation who had never heard of him or even seen his picture.
How might the United States be different today if our ancestors had access to the monumental amount of news and social media available today?
If I remember my American history correctly, the Nixon/Kennedy presidential debate was the first to be televised. At that time, several households did not have a television set, so those families listened to the debates on the radio. Even those who had television most likely had black and white sets, as color television was still in the future of a vast number of Americans.
Those who listened to the debate on the radio, but did not see the televised debate, determined that Nixon presented best; conversely, those who watched the televised debate favored Kennedy overall. Nixon appeared to be nervous and sweated more, while youthful, poised Kennedy registered favorably, particularly with female voters.
Amazingly, looks played a part in election results long before the advent of technology. Poor Lincoln! From his childhood, his appearance was considered homely, and some were not even that kind when commenting upon his features (Source: http://www.physical-lincoln.com/appearance.html#:~:text=1858%3A%20%22I%… Retrieved June 11, 2025).
Lincoln dealt with problems arising from his looks when he campaigned against Senator Stephen A. Douglas for a seat in the United States Senate. He alluded to this in a speech he gave in Springfield, Illinois on July 17, 1858:

There is still another disadvantage under which we labor, and to which I will ask your attention. It arises out of the relative positions of the two persons who stand before the State as candidates for the Senate. Senator Douglas is of world wide renown. All the anxious politicians of his party . . . have been looking upon him
as . . . at no distant day . . . President of the United States. They have seen in his round, jolly, fruitful face, post offices, land offices, marshalships and cabinet appointments, chargeships and foreign missions, bursting and sprouting out in wonderful exuberance ready to be laid hold of by their greedy hands . . . And as they have been gazing upon this attractive picture so long, they cannot . . . bring themselves to give up the charming hope . . . On the contrary nobody has ever expected me to be President. In my poor, lean, lank face, noboby has ever seen that any cabbages were sprouting out . . . These are disadvantages . . . that the Republicans labor under. We have to fight this battle upon principle . . . alone. I am . . . made the standard-bearer . . . of the Republicans . . . merely because there had to be someone so placed—I being in no wise, preferable to any other one . . . in the Republican ranks. Then I say I wish it to be distinctly understood and borne in mind, that we have to fight this battle without many . . . of the external aids which are brought to bear against us. (Source: https://www.mrlincolnandfreedom.org/pre-civil-war/house-divided-speech/… Retrieved June 11, 2025)

Personality so often plays a part in people’s choices of who will represent their interests in local and national politics. Sometimes, neither choice is overly likeable, and voters choose the choice who is least offensive.
It’s an old cliché, but it’s true—you can’t judge a book by its cover. Sometimes the most charming political personality doesn’t have the best ethics or the wisest program. Sometimes it’s the not-as-attractive, soft-spoken, less flashy nominee who has the potential to provide the best leadership as local, state and national government representatives.
Lincoln lost his bid for the United States Senate in 1858, but the Lincoln-Douglas debates paved the way for him to become President of the United States a short two years later. It was Lincoln whose picture wound up on the five-dollar bill, making his visage a familiar image to practically every American and much of the world. There are many less people who can identify a portrait of Stephen A. Douglas.
Dear Reader, I know this is not an election year, but the time seemed right for this subject. There is no better time to prepare ourselves to be informed voters in the next election than to become wise to what is happening in our government now. Why is this so important? Consider this statement that was included in an email I once received: Who else had a “ministry of truth” . . .Hitler . . . Goebbels . . . Stalin!
If only they had known.

ANSWER TO QUESTION OF THE WEEK # 62
Why did the invisible man turn down the job? (ANSWER: He couldn’t see himself working there.)

QUESTION OF THE WEEK # 63
A burglar stole all my lamps. What was my emotional state? (See next week’s article in historicunioncounty.com for the answer.)