1900 and 1910, she was arrested 30 times. paid jail fines from her lecture fees and the sales of her souvenir hatch et ceterlement e. she moved to wichita and where she died on june 11th, 1911. prohibition didn't end in the united states until 33 ka'33. prohibition continued in kansas until $'48. the liquor laws didn't catch up with the rest of the nation until the late 19 items. 19 items. this weekend, american history tv is featuring wichita, kansas. our local content vehicles recently visited wichita to learn about its rich history. learn more at cspan.org/local

content. next month, we'll feature jefferson city, missouri. you're watching american history tv. all weekend, every weekend, on c-span3. starting sunday, american history tv features the contenders, a 14 week series on key political figures who ran it for president and lost but who never the less changed political history. tomorrow we begin with former house speaker henry clay of kentucky, known as the great compromiser. next we preview the series and all 14 contenders with three historian, richard norton smith, jean baker and karl cannon. this is about an hour 30 minutes. richard, when you and mark decided the list for the contender, what was your objective? >> to give viewers an alternative school of american political history in particular. it's been observed that the

winners write the history books. there was a lot of truth to that. but that means that we're deprived of like the dark of side of the moon. there's another whole story line. and even more on the biographical level, there are 14 people in it series. many of whom i guarantee viewers may never have heard of, and all of whom i can pretty much guarantee they will find interesting to fascinating and certainly surprising. >> jean, do you have somebody in mind that might have been the most important contender in history for the presidency? >> well, i think that some modern bying on graphers say that losing candidates in the last 20 years, people have even said george wallace is the most important loser. i don't think that at all. i have to go back to the 19th century and pick up with henry clay. he ran three times and that's

one of the hinft hi of the thin interested me. they keep at it. and it gives me new insight into defeat. which i would think one of the most humiliating things that could happen to you, if you're henry clay, you've arrived at the kentucky house of assembly and almost immediately everyone is saying you go to washington, you're speaker of the house, what a humiliation and yet he kept coming back. and i do believe that he's one of these 45 who had he been elected, either in 1824 or 1832 or 1836, he really would have made a difference in terms of the history of the country. >> which of these contenders would you like to have covered? >> william jennenin jennings br.

she talked about recidivists. he's a lifer. there are echos of him will even today. i was at a rally -- not a rally. republican event. the republican establishment actually in new orleans. and all of a sudden this chant breaks out, he saend the fed, ee fed. that's ron paul's people. they're in the house. that's the cross of gold speech, the modern versions. so not only are they recidivi recidivists, but their themes echo through the years. they never -- and finally it's like they finally get their way even if they lose. >> and they've redefined defeat. one they think you find as you go through the list is over and over again there are people who lose an election, and in the immediate sense may be written off as a loser. but who in fact in some cases turn out to be catalysts for political changes that will

transform the country. you think of al smith in 1928. he paved way for franklin roosevelt and the urban immigrant labor coalition that sustained the democratic party up to and through john f. kennedy. or even more, barry goldwater who lost overwhelming in 1964 to lyndon johnson. people said conservatism was dead. and the fact is goldwater planted the seeds of a conservative movement that i would argue has yet to crest. >> would any of these contenders have done better with television some some of them had division, but a lot didn't. >> i think let's try james blaine and your guy. bryant certainly would have done well. >> when did blaine run? >> 1884 against -- help me,

colleagues. >> grover cleech lancleveland. >> and that's a funny american election that all americans should know about. grover cleveland has a child born out of wedlock, so we have this wonderful couplet where, mom, he's gone to the white house, ha-ha-ha. on the other hand we have blaine who is corrupt and there is compromising letters involving females or sexual affairs, but in this case it's something to do with his taking bribes and working for the railroad. so the american voter on one level is faced with this who are you going to vote for. personal sin or the kind of

public sin of james blaine. >> to turn your question around, though, a common complaint of modern candidates who are not elected is that they would prefer to have run before that was division. substance is driven out. in the 1984 campaign, i was covering allen cranston.divisio. substance is driven out. in the 1984 campaign, i was covering allen cranston. he ran for president in the primaries. he didn't do very well. he finished sixth if you want to count it that way, but reagan actually got more write-in votes and he had to quit. we were on the airplane going back to los angeles in an old delta plane to l.a.x. and i'm sitting beside him and he says, karl, abraham lincoln couldn't be elected today. and i was taking notes and i stopped taking notes. and he said do you want to write that down? i saidic i think i'll do you a faefr, sir, i'm not going to put

that in my story. and he said why not? i said -- what he was getting at is that gary hart was this pretty face and that he couldn't break through to be the guy who runs against mondale. and i said, well, because lincoln was the greatest writer we've ever had in that office since jefferson held it and if he was running now, all of the people on this plane, and i turned to all the roerteporters would quit and work for him. >> is there a contender on the list do you think could have gotten elected today because television that didn't get elected -- >> tom dewey would have done -- his career spanned the introduction of television. >> who did he run against? >> he ran twice. not only twice, he ran three times. he ran against fdr in 1944, and of course famously against harry truman in 1948. but remember, dewey had been the gang buster, this great courtroom prosecutor who became famous while he was still in his

30s for putting away the lukes of lucky luchiano and others. he was a courtroom performer. and that translated superbly well to a television studio. >> oh, now, richard, let me disagree a little bit. i mean, this is a guy that has, and i have to look around. is it claire booth luce who said he looks like he's an ornament on a wedding cake. >> but the other side of that, he, for example, he was a number of guys -- he couldn't be handled. people said the first thing you have to do is shave off your mustache. it reminds people of charlie chaplain or worse, hitler. and he wouldn't. and he wouldn't -- he also had remember the two front teeth, there was a big gap between his teeth. he wouldn't do it.

why? his wife liked him that way. that tells you something about personal character if nothing else. but i think there's a persuader, someone who would marshal facts and make the tv camera his ally, i think he would have -- >> how about wilke in runs against vo against roosevelt? >> wilke seems to me to be a little soft. he belongs where he came from. in corporate executive rooms. he doesn't have any public training. and i do believe that there's a certain level of exposure that contenders and winners need. as long as i briefly have the floor, i'd like to present to all of you an idea of why it is

contenders are important. of course we're always talking about winners. americans love winners. but we impose from our position just a one person race. and we lose all of the context. at the time when americans were voting for these men, they were look at an entirely different landscape. sometime we overinterpret this. if we could get the contenders back into the race, and by the way, on 9 ethe' o eve of the u.n in tennis, presidential politicians are not a horse race. they're more of a tennis match

where you have an opponent and where we remove the opponents, we lose it seems to me all of the depth. >> to go back to your original question, why this subject, why now, it's a subject that has been too long ignored and the timing couldn't be better at an alternative to exactly the kind of horse race trivial back and forth poll obsessed coverage that passes for most of political journalism. >> karl, who would you -- these questions are somewhat trite, but who of you of all the 14, who would you like to have three of them at a table and you're the host for a little lunch or dinner party. >> a debate on capitalism when wendell wilke who ran utilities,

i'm not sure you'd need a third, but the populism of george wallace, wouldn't that be a lively conversation? >> the kind of person that would be funnest to talk to among these 14. >> well, look -- >> not that clay would be -- >> let's talk -- all right. henry clay. >> why would he be fun? >> by all accounts, this was the most -- along with andrew jackson, his great enemy, will was the most charismatic gall galvanizing polarizing magnet figure. and by all account, there was an ora, a spell about the man. it went so far beyond charm. >> his very nickname, the great compromiser. the country is being split apart and he wants to keep it together, but he's very much identified with one side. and he's a partisan guy who wants to unite people. i mean, all of the problems of

the era you could get from this guy and why we couldn't elect him is the same reason we eventually went to war. they couldn't be resolved. >> he ran against three different people for the presidency? >> yes. >> and he was secretary of state and speaker of the house and senator. >> and constructive states man. that's the interesting thing about these.man. that's the interesting thing about these. you talk about blaine and cleveland. each man with impressive blemishes to their personal or political character, and yet if you look at their record in office, not only cleveland's as president, he's generally regarded as the most impressive between lincoln and tiara, but blaine's, these are very, very impressive -- >> and off the list perhaps in a parentheses we should talk about some contenders that we should

forget. parker. >> except that they're already forgotten. >> you wrote a book on the stephens stephensons. >> any meal with adlai stevenson. >> did you ever meet him? >> no. i did spend time with his son who was an illinois senator and then resigned in 1980, made a big tactical mistake, went back and ran for governor in the state of illinois and was beaten by big jim thompson. retired from politics. that's the interesting thing about most of these people i think are really committed to anything in public service. and they're all effective

politicians. ed a today ladlai stevenson had side of i'm not sure i really want to be doing this and yet he's given some of the beth epitaphs that we have in americ. in his campaign this 1952, i remember the aisle stop tellii' the truth about the republicans if they so that telling lies about the democrats. and about richard nixon, he's the kinds of guy that will talk environment after he's cut a tree down and is standing on a give a stump speech. >> steven son said there are still a dwindling band of americans knowning a the egg heads. the idea of the intellectual. we now know it was greatly exaggerated. in fact the one book found on governor stephenson's night table was the social registry which is some ways is a --

>> i'm not sure that's exactly true. but i'll give you a pass on that. >> he brought civility, he brought up a high sense of purpose and great champagne wit. and a sense of the ridiculous. going back to what you said. and he was a man ahead of his time. he's the first man to talk about the new frontier. in the 1950s campaign, he's talking about the nuclear test ban treaty he's impossession votes for 18-year-olds. and that's another critical function of these also rans. they often introduce ideas that may not be accepted at the seem, but who in fact find the way into the political bloodstream and become the northern. >> but can we turn that around and say do any of these contenders representmthern. >> but can we turn that around and say do any of these contenders representhern.

>> but can we turn that around and say do any of these contenders representern. >> but can we turn that around and say do any of these contenders representrn. >> but can we turn that around and say do any of these contenders representn. >> but can we turn that around and say do any of these contenders represent. >> but can we turn that around and say do any of these contenders represent the past, a moment in campaigned and it was the end of a certain style or a certain number of issues or whatever? >> back to henry clay. he's a tragic figure also, in a way. the great thing dividing this country is the west is opening up and we know that the united states is going to go all the way to the pacific ocean, but are the states going to be free states or slave states it in sn and clay is standing literally as stride of history. he wants the west to open. he doesn't want the union rendered. but he doesn't want them to all be free states because he doesn't want his beloved south to be marginalized. and so that campaign of 1850 is the last time when you can really straddle that issue. and he paid for it and we paid for it. >> stephenson o, i was thinking

about echos of the future. he served in the u.n. from the kennedy administration and the kennedys found him wanting. he wasn't tough enough. but what does that really information shadow. stephenson, not the kennedys in that sense. this idea that -- and we hear it in barack obama. this idea that we're going to work with the world community, not dictate to the world community, that becomes -- that enters the democratic party's dna. >> but you can go back and forth. the anti-imperialism of will criminal jennings bryan, you know, which finds expression.wiu know, which finds expression. and then projecting it on to a george mcgovern. the idea of america as a republic, not an empire. there are consistencies that are really extraordinary. clay, you can look at henry clay, an alternative way of seeing familiar facts, you can

look at henry clay who failed to chief his goal, he never became president. but to the extent that he contributed, he wasn't the only one responsible for the compromise of 1850, he died shortly thereafter. what did that do? that precluded war for ten years. ten years for the north to grow industrially and otherwise. ten years. >> ten years for the south to gain a sense of independence. the national convention in 1852 begins this -- there's this idea that we are a separate unit, we may become a separate nation. >> but imagine if the union had broken in 1850. does anyone believe there was the leadership -- if nothing else, henry clay give us ten years for abraham lincoln to

emern emerge. >> are you including buchanan? >> and remember, henry clay was lincoln's -- one very quick thing. talk about how is this relevant to today. well, remember, a few years ago when i believe it was bill cristol and others at the weekly standard were talking about what they called national greatness conservatism. it's not a phrase that you hear much today, but it was very much one grounded in clay was part of that tradition, went back to alexander hamilton. the idea of an energetic government doing conservative things. government as an engine of economic development. and clay wasn't just about running for president. clay give us something he called the american system, which was an enormous shot in the arm to the infrastructure of america and the early american economy.

>> let's do something for those watch to go catch them up on all of these 14. let me go backwards. let me go to the newest one on the list that will be shown on december the 9th. and move very quickly and have you all just pop in with quick comments about what relevance these people had at that time. ross perot will be our december 9th program. what would you say about him? >> third party outsider. and in some ways, a cultivator of what's very clear now and that is lots and lots of american angst. >> even more specifically, former head of the tea party in many ways before ross perot's great accomplishment was to insist that the two major political parties deal with the deficit. >> i would add to that. i went to a concert one day and we had just had a conference where i was working on the newspaper and they said nobody cares about the deficit.

and then per root give as speec about if and a magician sings a song about it and apparently they do care about the deficit. and perot did would things. he may have gotten bill clinton elected. and he may have actually stopped this movement for a while. this tea party thing is very much -- you talk to any of the people, they think we're spending too much money. perot talked about this, he had his pie charts and we laughed at him. he got almost 20% of the the vote after he quit the race and entered when he behaved in a flaky way, after he had really run for president, he still got 20% of the vote. and that's what you're seeing. >> we can come back to some of this, but our next -- >> is that too long on each one? >> no, it's good. december the 2nd will be george mcgovern. what pops out. >> the media says george mcgovern and his commission rewrote the rules by which the

democratic parties nominated its candidates. >> 1972. >> 1972, he was the immediate beneficiary of that. but in a broader sense, mcgovern is in this tradition that you can take back to steven son, back to william jennings bryan.k to william jennings bryan.steve to william jennings bryan. anti-war strain. oversimplified to say the left wing of 9 democrthe democrat i . >> they began to look at the race so tactically. mcgovern gave his speech at 2:00, 3:00 in the morning. he picked twrong vice president. he's the campaign when we start to pay very close attention to the mechanics. and the fact that he loses in a land slide doesn't change that. we're hooked on process. and that's one unlikely legacy of mcgovern. >> i think of getting only 38%

of the vote. that was a catastrophe. that's probably the lowest percentage in a two party race in a century. and here is this guy that did not run a good campaign, and yet he understood politics. he had been able somehow in south dakota to be elected. i realize that's quite a challenge. >> our november 25th program with george wallace. >> wallace ran as a racist. he was the last person on do it. >> 1968 and '72. >> and he would hold his press conferences.t on do it. >> 1968 and '72. >> and he would hold his press conferences.>> 1968 and '72. >> and he would hold his press conferences. i was in high school. he would turn to the print guys and say you knew who i mean.

and that was a period of -- that was a passing of an era. that's the end of the discussion in a way that we were talking about henry clay. >> richard norton smith. >> couldback to what you were s about mcgovern. if you look at the 43% in 68 and 60%, the vast bulk of that are the wallace voters. george wallace had an enormous impact'68 and 60%, the vast bulk of that are the wallace voters. george wallace had an enormous impact of the politics and governance of his time. you think of the strategy and supreme court nominees that nixon wanted to put organization nixon understood that for him to submit what people then talked about -- >> 13% of the vote in 1968. what comes to your mind?>> 13% . what comes to your mind?about -

>> 13% of the vote in 1968. what comes to your mind? >> what's been said, but beyond that, a guy who really was corrupt in the sense that he manipulated public opinion in the south. as i understand his early career, this is a man who was not as his predecessor, patterson, was, but at some point george wallace understands that his private ambitions are going to require this terrible assault and so he begins this process whereby he sells out. the other thing that's interesting about george wallace is he sort of floodses in and out of the democratic party and he runs with the american independent party.

>> fourth. first time he gets liyndon johnson. the first time the term backlash was coined, the idea that white would wield the democratic party and vote for a george wallace in the primaries and then my great in time to vote for goldwater that fall were to become conservative republicans. >> most of 18th is hubert humphrey. what comes to mind. >> just a lot of heartfelt emotion for -- >> you liked him. >> our daughter was graduating from the university of pennsylvania and we went very happily to the graduation and 3 1/2 hours later after his 1 1/2 hour graduation speech, we left. but nonetheless, hubert humphrey

to me was indeed the happy warrior, which is a name given to al smith who i don't think -- >> by? who says the phrase happy warrior at the '28 convention? >> fdr. >> a speech written for him. which was fun any because smith was no kind of happy warrior, but fdr was and hubert singcerty was. >> 1948, he leads the walk out -- he prompts the walk out of the dixie accurates. he says it's time to emerge from the shadow. >> lost in '68. >> one of the great moments that everybody should be proud of. that's what i think of hubert humphrey. >> and he also transforms the vice presidency in a surprising way because he had such a