The Pros And Cons Of Andrew Jackson

707 Words2 Pages

Regardless of the time period, we are interfered by the corrupted individuals and the organizations, especially in the world of politics. The competitions eventually leads to improper use of money, power, and status. Back in the time of 1824, the election was marked by the “corrupt bargain”. Next election in 1828 was the battle of two candidates from different parties. On one side was John Quincy Adams representing National Republicans assisted by Henry Clay who is known for the corrupt bargain in 1824. The opposite side was Andrew Jackson known as “Old Hickory”representing Democratic-Republicans. If I was living at the time of the 1820s, regarding his success, I will vote for Andrew Jackson, but with some suspicions left in my mind. First of all, it is obvious to all the citizens about the corrupt bargain of 1824 even though there’s no definite evidence. As a result, protests and resentments rose among the supporters of Jackson against John Quincy Adams who became president with the power of influential Clay. How can I trust such president who may endanger us and the entire United States? Also, President Adams had purchased game tables for the presidential palace with his own money …show more content…

Andrew Jackson demonstrated his leadership and running for election with the fame of war hero just like Washington. In Contrast, John Quincy Adams didn't achieve anything memorable during his administration. Instead, he used to be splendid Secretary of State to James Monroe. He’s more suitable to be assistant rather than being a president. Only concerns about Jackson is that he’s a slaveholder and afflicted with a violent temper (The American Pageant, Pg.262). Therefore, he has a possibility of exceeding his duty like what he did during the Florida acquirement. Actually, under Jackson, we weren’t able to relieve because of fear that he may cause

Open Document