“Orchestrating” the Campaign:
The Sounds of American Presidential Elections
COLIN G. ZELICOF
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
Throughout American electoral history, presidential candidates have utilized a
wide array of campaign techniques in order to distinguish themselves from their
competition. None however possessed the innovation of Andrew Jackson’s
campaign for president in 1824. Jackson’s unprecedented employment of the
campaign jingle helped him to triumph over three other prominent Presidential
contenders, which subsequently prompted the widespread utilization of music in
future campaigns. This paper aims to trace the use of music in presidential
campaigns through American electoral history, evaluate the efficacy of music by
examining statistical data, and discuss the various legal issues associated with
music in campaigns.
AN AMERICAN TRADITION
The 1824 presidential election was one of the most closely contested races
in American history. Four prominent candidates sought the Presidency in an
election that ultimately proved inconclusive by the Electoral College; no candidate
received the majority of electoral votes necessary to win (McNamara 2007).
However, despite the electoral gridlock, a clear frontrunner emerged. Andrew
Jackson, a nationally revered war hero, utilized a means of conveying his message
to the American people that was unprecedented in American electoral history.
Jackson adopted “The Hunters of Kentucky,” a tune written by Samuel Woodworth
to portray Jackson’s heroism and bravery, as his official campaign anthem.
Jackson’s innovative campaign strategy helped him to bolster his popularity
amongst the public, and eventually attain the votes needed to elect him President of
the United States (Schimler 2002). The event marked the first time in American
history in which a Presidential candidate utilized music to galvanize public support.
Since the 18th century, music has proven to effectuate immense change in
the American political arena. While under British rule, American patriots fought
British injustices by circulating songs and jingles throughout the colonies. One such
tune, titled “The Liberty Song,” helped to fuel public support for independence by
affirming American pride and identity in the wake of harsh British oppression (The
Massachusetts Historical Society). Following the American Revolution, patriotic
songs continued to pervade American political culture, celebrating the heroism of
the nation’s new leader George Washington. Set to the tune of England’s “God
Save the Queen,” the newly composed “God Save George Washington” quickly
became a household favorite (Suddath 2008). Years later, when America faced the
brink of defeat in the War of 1812, Francis Scott Key told the proverbial tale of
American perseverance and courage in his tune “The Star Spangled Banner.” In
times of triumph and times of tribulation, music served as a powerful tool to inspire
the American masses throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. Music bolstered
awareness about various economic and security issues, and celebrated American
political and military victories.
Andrew Jackson’s revolutionary use of music in 1824 however, transformed
music’s role in the American political theater forever. Jackson’s narrow win over
political greats such as Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams prompted the
widespread utilization of music in future Presidential campaigns.
THE CAMPAIGN JINGLE
The 1840 Presidential election was consumed by fears that the economic
instability perpetuated by the Panic of 1837 would continue to get worse.
Challenger William Henry Harrison fought ardently to convince the American
people that President Martin Van Buren was predominantly responsible for the
economic downturn. He painted Van Buren as a wealthy aristocrat who lived
extravagantly while the rest of the nation faced widespread poverty and
unemployment. In contrast, Harrison portrayed himself to the masses as a middleclass public servant who has always fought for the people (Formisano 1993). He
commissioned the tune “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” to help spread his message
throughout the country. The song, written by Alexander Coffman Ross, depicts
Harrison as a man of the people and a war hero who understands the needs of the
public. The jingle conversely portrays President Van Buren to be a failed leader
whose defeat in the election is inevitable. “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too” ultimately
played a critical role in strengthening Harrison’s public support, and helped him to
easily defeat Van Buren in the general election (Silber 1971).
While music played an integral role in Harrison’s election in 1840, the
campaign jingle failed to provide Ex-General George McClellan with the electoral
boost needed to overcome President Abraham Lincoln’s widespread popularity in
the Election of 1864. Upon winning the Democratic nomination, McClellan
launched a platform criticizing Lincoln for failing to unite the country, which
subsequently prompted hundreds of thousands of deaths in The Civil War
(Vorenberg 2001). The jingle that McClellan utilized to help convey his message to
the American people was “Little Mac! Little Mac! You’re the Very Man,” written
by the revered composer Stephen C. Foster. The tune censured Lincoln for
sacrificing the nation’s unity to eradicate slavery for an implied “lesser” people.
Nevertheless, key military victories for the North immediately prior to Election Day
bolstered Lincoln’s popularity and effectively solidified McClellan’s defeat (Parlor
Songs).
During the 1888 Presidential election, incumbent Grover Cleveland
similarly failed to overcome his opposition despite the use of a campaign jingle.
The tune entitled “Hurrah! Hurrah! For Cleve and Steve,” by Henri Schoeller,
highlighted President Cleveland’s relentless pursuit of a more united America.
However, despite the jingle’s powerful rhetoric, President Cleveland’s numerous
politically unpopular actions diminished his electoral base and subsequently
prompted Benjamin Harrison’s victory in the election (Parlor Songs).
With the onset of the 20th century, campaign jingles evolved to contain a
more polished structure with more strategic lyrics. William Taft in the 1908
Presidential election employed a jingle composed by Annie Bassett to galvanize his
supporters and spread his message throughout the nation. Bassett’s tune, entitled
“Our Good and Honest Taft” adopted a musical structure that was unprecedented in
Presidential campaigns: the waltz. The waltz’ upbeat musical qualities helped to
make the jingle memorable in the minds of the American people. In addition to the
jingle’s structure, Basset strategically crafted lyrics to portray Taft as a man of the
people as opposed to his opponent William Henry Harrison, who was a lifelong
politician. The lyrics state, “He has said it to his credit, let us cheer him with a will:
Although I'm slated president, I’m just a plain man still. Tis the key-note of the
poor man and the man all free of graft, whom 'tis said shall be president- our good
and honest Taft.” Ultimately, Taft’s broad appeal as a commoner with both liberal
and conservative values helped him to triumph over William Henry Harrison in the
general election (Parlor Songs).
Taft’s tremendous success with “Our Good and Honest Taft” in 1908,
motivated both Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt to adopt their own
respective jingles in the Election of 1912. Wilson, the Democratic nominee,
adopted a platform advocating individualism and states’ rights. Crafted to the lively
musical structure of a march, “Wilson- That’s All,” by Ballard MacDonald
underscored the fact that Wilson is the official Democratic Party nominee, therefore
undermining Roosevelt’s credibility as a candidate (Chace 2004). Roosevelt, the
founder of the Bull Moose Party, supported progressive reforms and a strong
foreign policy. His jingle entitled “We’re Ready for Teddy Again” by Alfred
Solman, similarly adopted a march structure, and highlighted Roosevelt’s
accomplishments as President four years prior (Parlor Songs). Both jingles
successfully portrayed and accentuated each candidate’s platform to the American
people, however Wilson’s message proved to resonate stronger with the electorate
on Election Day.
Over the course of the next forty years, Presidential candidates employed
campaign songs as an avenue in which to convey their respective platforms to the
American people. Warren G. Harding commissioned the “President Harding
March,” Franklin D. Roosevelt utilized “Happy Days Are Here”, and Harry Truman
employed “I’m Just Wild About Harry.” (Schimler 2002). However, technological
innovations accompanying the post-WWII era forever revolutionized the way music
is used in presidential campaigns.
“IKE FOR PRESIDENT”
Dwight D. Eisenhower’s groundbreaking television ad featuring his “Ike for
President” jingle, cemented the transition from the obsolete distribution of
campaign jingles in sheet music form, to the presentation of campaign jingles in
televised political advertisements. The introduction of televised commercials
improved jingles’ electoral success as it allowed for campaign jingles to be
accompanied and accentuated by powerful visual images. In the “Ike for President”
advertisement, the tune’s lyrics portraying Eisenhower’s widespread support were
bolstered by images of individuals of all different races, genders, ages, and
occupations, marching in support of Eisenhower (The Living Room Candidate).
Dwight D. Eisenhower’s innovative use of the campaign jingle prompted his
opponent, Adlai Stevenson to follow in suit. Set to the tune of “Old MacDonald
Had a Farm,” “Let’s Not Forget the Farmer” described Adlai Stevenson’s
commitment to preserving the progress that farmers have achieved since the end of
Great Depression. The jingle’s lyrics were accompanied by cartoon images of
modernized farms, and successful farmers subsequently driving to the polls (in their
expensive cars) to vote for Stevenson (The Living Room Candidate).
Throughout the next several decades, the televised campaign jingle had a
strong presence in Presidential campaigns. In 1960, John F. Kennedy conveyed his
embodiment of the critical balance of experience and youth to the American people
in his jingle “Kennedy.” To express this key relationship, juxtaposing images of
Kennedy as a young public servant and as a senior statesman accompany the
jingle’s lyrics “Do you want a man for President who's seasoned through and
through, but not so doggone seasoned that he won't try something new. A man
who’s old enough to know but young enough to do…it’s up to you, it’s up to you,
it’s strictly up to you” (The Living Room Candidate).
Richard Nixon similarly employed the use of powerful images to
complement the message expressed in the tune’s lyrics. In his jingle “Nixon Now,”
the lyrics highlight his vast accomplishments throughout his first term. The jingle
specifically emphasizes his foreign policy prowess, presenting images of him with
foreign leaders to supplement the lyrics “Reaching out across the sea, making
friends where foes used to be. Giving hope to humanity, Nixon now, Nixon now,
for you and me” (The Living Room Candidate).
THE DECLINE OF THE JINGLE
Technological innovations of the post WWII era perpetuated the
transformation of campaign jingles from sheet music to television. However, the
rise of television as the primary medium for political advertising ultimately caused
the demise of the campaign jingle in presidential politics, as the underlying role that
music played in presidential campaigns fundamentally shifted. Whereas early-
televised jingles focused on the music and its lyrics, televised advertisements soon
evolved to contain music in a background accompaniment role. Music no longer
transmitted concrete information to voters through lyrics, but rather accentuated the
advertisement’s message by evoking certain emotional sentiments.
In Richard Nixon’s 1968 campaign TV advertisement entitled “The First
Civil Right,” the background music consists of a cacophonic medley of sporadic
percussion and brass sequences. As the narrator discusses the dozens of gruesome
images portraying domestic violence, the accompanying music amplifies the
viewer’s unease and disgust. Walter Mondale similarly employs a daunting
percussion sequence in the background of his ad “Failure 3,” in order intensify the
sentiments of fear associated with the advertisement’s description and
accompanying images of Reagan’s flawed foreign policy record (The Living Room
Candidate).
While music can be used to evoke fear and insecurity, it can also be
employed to induce sentiments of hope and optimism. In Ronald Reagan’s
renowned 1984 TV ad entitled “Stronger, Prouder, Better,” the narrator portrays an
America that is safer and more economically prosperous than ever. The ad’s
powerful rhetoric is accompanied by the inspiring images of people getting married,
going to work, and raising the American flag. In the background, the sound of a
small woodwind ensemble playing a melodious and uplifting tune strengthens the
advertisement’s message of happiness and sanguinity. George H.W. Bush also
relied on music to amplify his message in his ad “Family/Children.” In this stirring
commercial, Barbara Bush paints her husband as a simple man who loves spending
time with his family and friends. While no policy issues were discussed in the
advertisement, the First Lady’s message, accentuated by a beautiful piano-clarinet
duet in the background, succeeded in giving Bush an aura of amiability (The Living
Room Candidate).
In recent Presidential elections, candidates have abandoned the traditional
strictly positive or negative advertisement and instead adopted a more hybrid
structure, which contains both positive and negative components. This innovative
structure allows for a clear juxtaposition of positive and negative musical
techniques. Bill Clinton embodied this tactic in his 1996 advertisement entitled
“Drums,” describes Bob Dole’s copious flaws, followed by Clinton’s numerous
accomplishments. When the commercial discusses Dole, a loud and unsettling
timpani is playing in the background, intensifying the viewer’s negative feelings.
Conversely, as soon as the advertisement transitions to Clinton, a pair of upbeat
tom-toms with an electric guitar accompaniment follow suit. John McCain employs
a similar strategy in his 2008 TV ad entitled “Comparison.” In this overt
demonstration of positive and negative musical qualities, facts about Barack Obama
and John McCain are stated one after another. Two violins are playing in the
background, and whenever negative statements about Obama are made, the two
violins play harsh discordant sequences and whenever positive statements about
McCain are made, the two play beautiful major chords (The Living Room
Candidate).
MUSICAL DEMOCRATIZATION
For centuries, the music used in Presidential campaigns was monopolized
by the campaigns themselves. Candidates and their respective staffs would oversee
the production and distribution of campaign jingles, and later on, official campaign
TV advertisements containing music in the background. However, with the onset of
the Internet and social media, any person with an idea and a camera can compose a
political campaign song and share it with the world. This musical democratization
has empowered individuals to make a tangible difference in the outcome of political
elections. During the 2008 Presidential election alone, certain homemade musical
tributes to the Presidential candidates featured tens of millions of views on videosharing websites such as YouTube. These videos are able to achieve a tremendous
amount of popularity primarily because independently manufactured ads can be
more daring and controversial than official campaign-endorsed advertisements.
Issues that the Obama and McCain campaigns both tried to avoid, such as race and
religion, proved to be common themes amongst political musical tributes in videosharing communities. In addition, campaign songs shared on the Internet differed
from official campaign jingles in that they targeted certain constituencies and ethnic
groups. One of the most popular amateur campaign songs from 2008, entitled
“There’s No One as Irish as Barack Obama,” featured the lyrics “O’Leary,
O’Reilly, O’Hare, and O’Hara, there’s no one as Irish as Barack Obama.”
Similarly, a Louisiana-based folk group created a music video in Cajun, entitled
“Oui, On Peut--Yes We Can,” which contained lyrics that touted Obama’s various
accomplishments.
Ultimately, the proliferation of original musical compositions via social
media sources represents the latest transformation in the role that music plays in
Presidential campaigns.
DOES MUSIC MAKE A DIFFERENCE?
“Consultant Dean Rindy believes the soundtrack…can be the key to
what makes an ad work. Ron Faucheux, editor in chief of
Campaigns and Elections magazine, contends, “music is crucial to
[an advertisements’] overall emotional appeal” (Rindy 1992;
Faucheux 1994).
From campaign jingles to televised political advertisements, music has
played an integral role in Presidential campaigns for centuries. Its resilience through
history suggests that music truly does have tangible positive benefits for the
campaigns that employ it. However, only recently has this critical assumption’s
legitimacy been evaluated. In political advertisements, campaigns utilize music to
accentuate whatever message they are trying to convey. For positive
advertisements, campaigns accompany images of “softly lighted hometown
vignettes, romantic landscapes, and stirring patriotic imagery,” with “brightly
colored” and “soothing” sounds (Hallett 1998). In negative advertisements, “grainy
black-and-white footage” featuring “menacing visuals” and “chilling footage” are
accompanied by “low-toned ominous music, baleful chords, wailing sirens, sharp
blasts of percussion, and eerily repetitive piano notes” (Baden 1998) Furthermore,
discordant music in minor keys tends to strengthen sentiments of anxiety, whereas
melodic passages in major keys produce feelings of optimism. These powerful
musical cues are frequently covertly embedded into political advertisements in
order to bolster the arousal of specific emotions, without listeners even noticing (G.
Smith 1999; J. Smith 1999). Ted Brader, an Associate Professor of Political Science
at the University of Michigan, was one of the first researchers to conduct a series of
clinical studies to evaluate the efficacy of these musical cues.
In one study (Study # 1), Professor Brader examines music’s effect on
voters in both positive and negative advertisements. As seen in the results below,
music succeeds in negative advertisements to increase support amongst initially
undecided voters and voters who initially preferred the opponent, as compared to
negative advertisements without music. Music in positive advertisements succeeds
in increasing support amongst individuals who initially preferred the ad’s sponsor
and amongst individuals who were initially undecided as compared to positive
advertisements without music. However, positive ads with music also seemed to
repulse individuals who initially supported the opponent more so than positive
advertisements without music. Ultimately, the study illuminates how negative
advertisements with music are more successful in softening the opposition and
winning converts than do negative ads without music. Additionally, positive
advertisements with music are more likely to attract supporters and repulse
opponents than do positive ads without music.
Study # 1a
Study # 1b
In another study (Study # 2), Brader examined how music triggers the evocation of
certain sentiments. As seen in the results below, advertisements with uplifting and
patriotic music more successfully generate feelings of enthusiasm and pride than
ads without music. Similarly, advertisements that contain somber and discordant
music more successfully elicit feelings of fear and anger than ads without music.
Study # 2
Professor Brader’s studies collectively portray how advertisements with
music are more successful in eliciting emotions than advertisements without music.
However, the question that is subsequently raised is how do these stronger emotions
influence elections? The two studies below illustrate music’s ability to increase
voter participation in elections. The first chart (Study # 3) exemplifies how both
positive and negative advertisements perpetuate increased interest in campaigns
when both contain music, as opposed to advertisements that lack music.
Study # 3
The second study (Study # 4) shows how both positive and negative advertisements
lead to more political participation when they contain music than when they do not.
The only exception to this generalization is that negative ads with music tend to
slightly decrease individuals’ intention to vote in the general election in comparison
to negative ads that do not contain music. The study specifically measures political
participation through willingness to volunteer on a campaign, intention to vote in
the primary election, intention to vote in the general election, and overall level of
motivation.
Study # 4a
Study # 4b
Ultimately, Brader’s studies portray that advertisements with music are
more likely to influence voters and there subsequent political participation than
advertisements without music. Positive advertisements containing music have been
proven to more strongly energize a candidate’s base, and increase the prospect of
stimulating feelings of hope and optimism in viewers. In addition, positive ads with
music increase an individual’s likelihood of volunteering for a campaign, voting in
a primary election, voting in a general election, and overall level of political
motivation. Negative advertisements containing music similarly have been proven
to more successfully diminish the opponent’s electoral base, and increase the
prospect of inspiring feelings of fear in viewers. Negative ads with music have
additionally proven to increase an individual’s likelihood of volunteering for a
campaign, voting in a primary election, and overall level of political motivation. Dr.
Brader’s studies have collectively served to quantitatively affirm the notion that
music does in fact generate tangible positive results for campaigns that employ it.
Subsequently, the use of music has transcended political advertisements, and now
plays an integral role in campaign rallies and conventions as well.
A GREAT DEBATE
On a hot summer day in late June, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann
announced her candidacy for President of the United States. Criticizing President
Obama for his wasteful spending practices and failed social programs,
Representative Bachmann conveyed her vision of a more efficient government to
the people of Waterloo, Iowa. Her remarks lasted about twenty minutes, and upon
concluding, her husband and children joined her on stage, accompanied by the
famous upbeat tune “American Girl,” by Tom Petty (Vance 2011). Just hours later,
Mr. Petty publicly denounced Bachmann’s utilization of the song as copyright
infringement, and presented her with a cease and desist in order to prevent her from
employing his music in the future (Hull 2011).
The conflict that transpired between Michele Bachmann and Tom Petty is
indicative of a larger debate that has divided politicians and musicians for years. In
2008 alone, John McCain was accused of illegally appropriating music from
Jackson Browne, Van Halen, the Foo Fighters, Heart, Orleans, Frankie Valli, and
numerous others. Some such as the Foo Fighters simply publicly condemned the
McCain campaign’s actions, while others including Jackson Browne brought
numerous lawsuits against the candidate (Burdick 2008). John McCain, and many
other politicians in similar predicaments, defended themselves by arguing that the
use of copyrighted music in political campaigns is protected by the First
Amendment’s right to free speech (Graff 2009). Ultimately, this philosophical
debate between the protection of copyright law and the affirmation of free speech
has formed the context for disputes that arise when a political candidate is criticized
by a musician for illegally appropriating his/her music.
While legal conflicts between musicians and politicians have pervaded the
electoral process for decades, the judicial system has failed to establish precedent
one way or the other, and typically evaluates each conflict on a case-by-case basis.
When interpreting the validity of a musician’s claims against political campaigns,
courts are commonly guided by the application of the fair use doctrine. Fair use was
initially established in order to protect non-commercial free speech. Examples of
traditionally protected actions include embedding movie clips into movie reviews or
sharing copyrighted academic material in classroom settings. These acts are termed
“privileged use” and are legally permissible largely because the violator is not
benefiting fiscally. Courts have distinguished privileged use from non-privileged
use, which is when an individual illegally uses copyrighted material for commercial
gain (Jenkins 2011).
In applying these two judicial benchmarks, the question is raised whether
utilizing music in political campaigns without permission is classified as privileged
or non-privileged use (Crews 2001). In order to make this key determination, courts
have traditionally evaluated whether the musical material plays an integral role in
the advertisement or rally. For example, if a musical work is played in its entirety
during a political advertisement and has a strong bearing on the ad’s effectiveness,
the judicial system has empirically been more likely to accept a musician’s legal
claim. In addressing the issue of whether the use of music in campaigns is
privileged or non-privileged use, courts additionally evaluate whether the
employment of a song undercuts its market value. If there is a widespread practice
of licensing music and compensating musicians for the performance of their work,
then that constitutes a market, which in turn perpetuates an expectation that an artist
will be remunerated for the performance of his/her music. Courts have historically
determined that if such a market exists and artists have that subsequent expectation
of remuneration, campaigns cannot legally use their music without seeking
permission (Jenkins 2011).
When evaluating whether a political campaign has illegally appropriated
copyrighted music, the judicial system must also consider a legal dimension that
exists outside the realm of copyright law. The issue that courts must take into
account stems from the reason why many musicians sue political candidates for
employing their music in the first place. On most occasions, musical performers do
not resort to legal tools because they are ardent philosophical proponents of
copyright law. They instead sue politicians because they simply do not share the
same political views and do not want their music to assist or represent the
candidate’s campaign in any way. Empirically, almost never has a musician legally
challenged a politician with whom he/she shares political ideals (Jenkins 2011).
Courts must be cognizant of this due to the introduction of the “right to publicity”
doctrine. In the United States, organizations must compensate and seek permission
of individuals if the individual or his/her property is used to represent a product. For
example, companies must pay a celebrity if they wish to use that person’s name or
face to sell a certain good (Crews 2011). The judicial system must take this doctrine
into account when evaluating cases involving the utilization of copyrighted music
in political campaigns, because adopting a performer’s music can imply that the
performer endorses or represents that candidate’s campaign without seeking
permission from nor compensating the performer (Jenkins 2011).
Ultimately, cases involving the alleged illegal use of music by political
campaigns have pervaded the electoral process for decades. Each instance requires
the judicial system to determine the legitimacy of a musician’s claim by applying
myriad tests and benchmarks that transcend numerous areas of the law. Until higher
courts establish precedence and subsequently elucidate the constitutionality of each
side’s arguments, the timeless philosophical clash between free speech and
copyright law will continue to endure.
CONCLUSION
Our founding fathers invented it, Andrew Jackson revolutionized it, Dwight
Eisenhower modernized it, and the Internet democratized it. Throughout American
electoral history, the use of music in politics has constantly transformed and
evolved to surmount obstacles ranging from threatening technological innovations
to immense associated legal risks. However, despite numerous encumbrances and
the subsequent liquidity of its roles and functions over time, music’s importance in
political campaigns has continuously persisted, as music has the power to intensify
emotions, strengthen political participation, and win presidential elections.
Works Cited
Politics as Usual. Parlor Songs. 1997.
http://parlorsongs.com/issues/2002-11/thismonth/feature.php
The Liberty Song. The Boston Chronicle, Volume 1, Number 38, August 29September 5, 1768.
Burdick, Dave. McCain Angers Bands: Heart, Foo Fighters, Van Halen And Others
Mad At GOP. The Huffington Post. September 5, 2008.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/05/heart-van-halen-orleansj_n_124264.html
Chace, James. 1912. Simon & Schuster, 2004.
Crews, Kenneth. Looking Ahead and Shaping the Future: Provoking Change in
Copyright Law. Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA, Vol. 49, No. 2,
Winter 2001.
Graff, Gary. Jackson Browne, Republicans Settle Copyright Case. Billboard. July
21, 2009.
http://www.kwikalaw.com/links/Iser/Billboard%20%20Jackson%20Browne%20Settlement%20-%207.21.09.pdf
Hull, Anne. A Petty “Girl,” Bachmann, You Don’t Know How It Feels. The
Washington Post. July 1, 2011.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-petty-mind-cant-see-michelebachmann-as-toms-american-girl/2011/07/01/AGeX4IuH_story.html
Jenkins, Jennifer. Personal interview. March 11, 2011.
McNamara, Robert The Election Of 1824 Was Decided In The House Of
Representatives. October 27, 2007,
http://history1800s.about.com/od/leaders/a/electionof1824.htm
Schimler, Stuart. Singing To The Oval Office: A Written History Of The Political
Campaign Song. October 12, 2002,:
http://www.presidentelect.org/art_schimler_singing.html
Silber, Irwin. Songs America Voted By. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole
Books. 1971.
Suddath, Claire. Barack Obama: Signed, Sealed, Delivered I’m Yours. Time. 2008.
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1840981_1840998_18
40940,00.html
Vance, Lauren. Michelle Bachmann to Kick Off Campaign in Iowa. ABC News.
June 26, 2011.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/michele-bachmann-kick-off-campaigniowa/story?id=13934068
Vorenberg, Michael. The Deformed Child: Slavery and the Election of 1864 Civil
War History 2001 47(3): 240-257.