Talk:Mark Hanna

message: This is one of several claimants to the title of first modern campaign. It differs in degree, not in kind, from earlier campaigns; it differs equally from modern campaigns. For one thing, the tradition of "Aw shucks, I'm not running for office; my friends are too kind" was still retained.
Both wording here, as "first modern" and "forerunner", really need a source, and a real explanation. In fact, the only use of sources since 1922 seems to be in two sentences, one about who Hanna went to high school with, and one about Hanna as corporatist; in which our text is weasel-worded, and the quote in the footnote is not.  Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern campaign

message: "Expected to run" against Roosevelt is oversimplified at best.  Hanna knew he was too old and ill to be president but allowed some of the support for him to go on just as a means of rallying power.  ("Theodore Rex" is an excellent source on this and has some great cross reference in the back).  The Rove admiration thing is completely unsourced, I'd be surprised if he were so...forthcoming of his admiration of an "Old Guard" republican like Hanna who supported the Protective Tariff among other policies that I'd think would give Rove pause to actually state support seriously...  That might be something you say at the gridiron club as a joke.  Reboot (talk) 10:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: unreferenced statements

message: In the article it mentions McKinley's campaign out-spent Bryan's by 12-1.  However, the election of 1896 article, it says 5-1.  Huge difference there.... anyone know which is right?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.216.64.214 (talk) 23:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's difficult to say.  There was no campaign reporting laws in those days.  McKinley's 1896 campaign, according to Charles Dawes, raised about 3.5 million.  However that did not include such things as the railroads subsidizing parties going to see McKinley speak in Canton.  Reporters stated it was cheaper to come to Canton than to stay at home.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: we know more about McKinley's spending thanks to Dawes, a banker, who reported the $3.5 million. The Bryan numbers are vague estimates--even Bryan had no idea. State and local spending is not counted for either man, nor is private spending--such as marching clubs buying uniforms and banners or clubs and local donors pooling money to go see McKinley or sponsor a BBQ for 3000 people coming to see Bryan.. Rjensen (talk) 23:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  By the way, I plan significant work on this article over the next month or six weeks.  I'm doing the reading now.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: 12-1 outspending?

message: I was just skimming the article when I came across a confusing phrase in the "Electoral history" section: "All elections by the Ohio General Assembly." I know that you mean that the Ohio General Assembly elected senators, as the 17th Amendment didn't come into effect until 1913, but it took me a while to figure that out. Mentioning the 17th Amendment would help clarify things, I think.
Earlier in the article (under the "McKinley partisan" section) we find this sentence: "Hanna spent much of his time working to secure Sherman's re-election by the Ohio Legislature (senators were elected by state legislatures until the ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913)". Adding something along those lines to the note at the top of the "Electoral history" section would be helpful, I think, as well as making it a complete sentence. AmericanLemming (talk) 00:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Done/--Wehwalt (talk) 01:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  One comment 

message: I would be interested to find out why he was expelled from college. Mikenlesley (talk) 09:55, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Croly's book is PD in the US.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expulsion from college 

message: The Lede needs to be summarized more. Parkwells (talk) 22:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede is too long