During his Valley Forge speech earlier this month, where he stated this election is about whether democracy would survive, President Joe Biden asked, “Is democracy still America’s sacred cause?”

Biden believes former president and Republican frontrunner Donald Trump wants to end democracy while his campaign aims to preserve it. Now, Biden may be calling for democracy, but Trump is currently removed from primary ballots of Colorado and Maine. Even more, Democrats have blocked members of their own party from challenging the president in some primaries.

Holding primaries and challenging a sitting president are uncommon. Historically speaking, there have been four eligible presidents who were not renominated, the last of which being in LBJ in 1968.

Normally, incumbent presidents are not challenged and many states declare them winners without holding primaries. Yet, recent times are far from normal. Trump has several pending court cases. And, on the Democratic side, according to ABC News, Biden has the lowest approval ratings (about 33%) in the past 15 years. With numbers like this, it seems only right that other Democrats challenge Biden for the presidency.

In at least eight Democratic state primaries, one or more candidates challenging Biden are missing from the ballot. Currently, the two leading Democratic challengers, Minnesota Congressman Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson, author and founder of Project Angel Food, are missing from the ballot. Earlier Robert Kennedy Jr. threw his hat in the ring but when it was rejected, he decided to run as an Independent.

It is difficult to call anyone a contender as Democrats have not held debates, and states are ignoring candidates on their primary ballots. Even if the Democratic Party allows these challengers to run, they will face an uphill battle, but not an impossible one.

In several articles, I have said that the political craziness of 1968 is very similar to our own. When it comes to challenging a sitting president, once again, this comparison holds true.
In 1968, incumbent President Lyndon B. Johnson was preparing for a second run (it would be his third term as he completed John F. Kennedy’s term after his assassination, but by law a president can serve for 10 years.)

Like Biden, LBJ’s approval ratings were incredibly low, under 40%. Johnson’s biggest issue had been the war in Vietnam, which he claimed America was winning. However, 1968 began with the Tet Offensive which killed more than 2,600 American soldiers. Because of Johnson’s handling of the war, the student movement (student activists aiming to promote political, environmental or social change) began calling for Robert Kennedy, the younger brother of slain President John F. Kennedy, to challenge Johnson in the primaries.

Johnson and Robert Kennedy were famous political rivals. Kennedy wanted to replace Johnson and change his policies. Not knowing if he could win, and worried that an attempt might not only hurt his future chances but also divide the Democratic Party, Kennedy refused to run.
The student movement found another champion in U.S. Sen. Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota, who was critical of Johnson and his war policies. McCarthy did not believe the nation could survive four more years under the Johnson administration.

Knowing the odds were against him, students still rallied behind McCarthy. Many cut their hair and put on nice clothes to “Get Clean for Gene” and canvased neighborhoods. As always, the first primary was held in New Hampshire. To everyone’s surprise, McCarthy came in a close second, Johnson 49% to McCarthy’s 41%.

With blood in the water, Robert Kennedy also decided to challenge Johnson. On March 16, Kennedy threw his hat into the ring.

To the surprise of Kennedy, McCarthy and the nation, Johnson announced on March 31 that for the good of the nation in a time of crisis he would no longer seek the nomination of his party.
For only the fourth time in our nation’s history, a sitting president would not be renominated, opening the door for Kennedy. Yet, McCarthy had a head start and many of the students had already committed to him. It would take until May 7 for Kennedy to win his first primary in Indiana.

Kennedy and McCarthy went back and forth winning states, neither gaining a clear advantage. They also had to face a new challenger in Hubert Humphrey, Johnson’s vice president, who took up Johnson’s fight after he left the race. The Democratic Party was clearly split as the more liberal wing and students fought between McCarthy and Kennedy and the moderate Democrats supported Humphrey.

It went that way until the California Primary on June 2. After Kennedy’s win, he, too, was assassinated. Once again, the nation was in crisis as a second Kennedy had been shot down. As the nation mourned, McCarthy suspended his campaign for a while, opening the door for Humphrey.

I have often heard that if Kennedy had not been shot, he would have won the primary and beaten Nixon. I am not as convinced. The primaries were about to head south where Kennedy was not as popular. We will never know as Kennedy died in California and Humphrey was able to capture the nomination at the Chicago convention only to lose to Nixon in the general election. While this election was marred with tragedy, it did demonstrate the democratic process in action.

It is rare to challenge a sitting president, but under the right circumstances it may be necessary. While Johnson was not happy with the outcome, at least the challengers were allowed to stand up and say there can be a different path. Yet, in our current election, instead of a candidate, democracy may be what’s assassinated.

James Finck is a professor of history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He may be reached at HistoricallySpeaking1776@gmail.com.

With tensions in the Middle East elevated due to the conflict in Gaza and now American soldiers being killed by Iranian backed terrorists, I believe it is wise to learn as much as possible about the Middle East to make the most informed decisions possible going forward.

A key to understanding the Middle East is to understand Islam. While there are many similarities between Christianity and Islam, the differences make the two religions seem worlds apart. Just like it is impossible to understand Christianity without knowing Jesus of Nazareth, it is likewise impossible to understand Islam without knowing Muhammad. While there are dozens of portrayals of Jesus, most recently with “The Chosen,” there are no such programs about Muhammad, leaving most Westerners with little understanding of exactly who was Muhammad. To fill that void, Middle Eastern correspondent Lesley Hazleton wrote “The First Muslim: The Story of Muhammad” to show that Muhammad was a complex leader who led a difficult life.

Like Jesus, Muhammad drastically changed the world around him creating a religion that filled the world and shaped the lives of many today. Yet, Muhammad was also a man with human flaws that changed his message from one of peace to conflict.

While Hazleton breaks her book down into three parts, I actually found Muhammad’s life divided in half—the years before Medina  and the years after. There seemed to be a fundamental change in Medina as Muhammad went from being an outsider in Mecca, preaching a new religion, to the undisputed religious and political leader in Medina. It is similar to Christianity but a reverse order. Whereas the Old Testament was much more militant while the New Testament spoke of peace, in Islam the revelations that made up the Quran go in the opposite direction.

Muhammad had little chance for success. Being born after his father passed and his mother dying when he was six, he grew up an orphan in a society that cared little for orphans. Yet, without any power or prestige, he earned the reputation for integrity and honesty as he worked his way up to positions of importance with his uncle’s trading caravans. However, after feeling as if he had earned respect, he was reminded who he was when his uncle denied his marriage to his daughter because of his low status. Hazleton writes, “To a boy imbued with the rough egalitarianism of Bedouin life, all this could only have come as a shock. His own people had co-opted faith, piously declared it even as they contravened its most basic principles. From his perch on the sidelines, he saw the social injustices of what was happening all too clearly.”

One eventual positive in his life was Khadija, a wealthy women 25 years his senior, who hired him to help with her caravans until they fell in love, and she proposed marriage. While their years together were difficult, they loved and supported each other for 25 years.

When Muhammad first told her he heard the voice of the angel Gabriel and thought he was either possessed or going mad, Khadija told him to listen and accept the messages. She stood by him as he began to preach the message of Islam and felt the hatred from the Mecca elite. Muhammad loved Khadija and refused any other marriages until after her death.

According to Hazleton, during these early years, the verses in the Quran were “an impassioned protest against corruption and social inequity. They took the side of the poor and the marginalized, calling for advantaging the disadvantaged. They demanded a halt to the worship of the false gods of profit and power along with those of the totem stones. They condemned the concept of sons as wealth and the consequent practice of female infanticide. And above all, they indicated the arrogance of the wealthy—‘those who amass and hoard wealth,’ who ‘love wealth with an ardent passion,’ who ‘are violent in their love of wealth.’” Yet, turning away from the gods whom the pilgrims of Arabia visited could greatly hurt the wealth of Mecca, so much so that when Muhammad’s uncle and protector died, other Meccan leaders teamed up to kill the threat to their livelihood. Fortunately for Muhammad, he was warned in a dream and he and his followers made the trip to Medina where he had been invited to come as a judge but eventually became their leader and prophet.

In Medina, now as the leader, the revelations were less about a peaceful society and more about governance and control. Revelations now said, “Permission is granted to those who fight because they have been wronged…those who have been driven out of their houses without right only because they said our god is God.”

Consolidating his power, Muhammad eventually either exiled or killed the three Jewish tribes at Medina when they did not join Islam. Turning his attention toward Mecca, his forces began attacking caravans. Eventually the two cities were in an all-out war. Muhammad was able to take over Mecca making himself the undisputed political and religious leader.

Rising from an lowly outsider managing caravans for his uncle to become the religious and political leader, one would expect changes in the Quranic verses. It may have been the burden of leadership or the loss of Khadija, but Muhammad changed in Medina, which was reflected in the Quran. The verses transformed from societal actions to a guide to enforce God’s law.

Hazleton writes in such a way that the book reads more like a novel than nonfiction. Her storytelling ability brings the life of Muhammad to life for Western readers. She presents his life as a timeless journey of an underdog who grows up to start a major world religion. She is respectful in narration while at the same time showing that Muhammad is not just the prophet of Islam but also a man with both positive and flawed characteristics. Hazleton does an excellent job also explaining the origins of Islam while also challenging some false perceptions such as the role of women that occurred after the prophet’s death. For anyone concerned with the region, it is necessary to understand Islam and Hazleton’s “The First Muslim” is a perfect place to start for readers at any level.

James Finck is a professor of history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He may be reached at HistoricallySpeaking1776@gmail.com.

In 1984, Democrats needed a candidate to challenge the very popular Republican incumbent President Ronald Reagan. Democratic frontrunner Walter Mondale, an ex-U.S. senator and state attorney general from Minnesota who had also served as Jimmy Carter’s vice president, seemed as though he would be a shoo-in for the presidency; this was confirmed with his dominating Iowa Caucus win.

Yet, at the caucus, a lesser-known U.S. senator from Colorado fared much better than expected. Still, nobody really paid much attention to Gary Hart. That is until he shocked the political world by winning the New Hampshire primary. Though 10 years younger than Mondale, Hart, another Democrat, seemed like a different generation. His youth and charisma reminded voters of Kennedy–something he did not try to discourage.

Hart then continued his run, winning both Vermont and Wyoming. He insisted he was a new type of Democrat who had new ideas. He wanted to cut taxes while at the same time increase welfare and healthcare for all. What helped halt Hart’s momentum was during the March 11th televised debate after Hart laid out his plan, Mondale turned to the camera and said, “Where’s the beef?”

Mondale’s question implied Hart was all talk and no substance. While the slogan itself did not solely defeat Hart, it did stick to his campaign and made more people question his policies.

The line resonated with voters because it had recently aired as a slogan for Wendy’s Restaurants during the previous Super Bowl. The commercial starred three elderly ladies eating at Home of the Big Bun. When one lady opened her burger to find an exaggerated tiny hamburger patty, she exclaimed, “Where’s the beef?”

It’s no surprise that Super Bowl commercials made their way into political campaigns. Super Bowls in this country are a big deal. In fact, of the top 30 most watched television programs of all time, 23 are Super Bowls.

Part of the reason for large crowds is that many Americans love football. But that alone does not account for such high ratings. Another major factor are the commercials. Even viewers who are not sports fans watch this one game more and more regularly because of the heartwarming, comedic or even sometimes outlandish advertisements.

During the regular season only 35% of women watch football. Super Bowl ratings show that number jumps up to 75%. That is a huge leap! And it’s mostly because of commercials. Even for men, the next morning around the water cooler, it seems like more are debating which were the best commercials more than recapping the plays on the field. Commercials have taken the Super Bowl from a paramount sporting event to a cultural phenomenon.

“Where’s the beef?” is not the only phrase to make it into our everyday vocabulary. In 1993, after Larry Bird and Michael Jordan played the greatest game of HORSE ever for a Big Mac and fries, the phrase “nothing but net” became the catchphrase that is now heard during every basketball contest from schoolyard picks to the NBA. In 2010, the E*TRADE baby first used the line, “Well, that’s going to cost you a lot of money.” That phrase has been used in boardrooms ever since. Of course, let’s not forget that in 2002 the greeting for any group of guys became “Whassup” after the Budweiser commercial.

While “Where’s the Beef” may be the most famous example of the relationship between the Super Bowl and politics, there have always been subtle political or cultural messages–especially recently.

Many ads have catered to the left’s message of diversity and inclusion. Coca-Cola’s “It’s Beautiful” 2014 commercial showed every shade of humanity while “America the Beautiful” played in multiple languages, and Airbnb’s 2017 “We Accept” commercial was pretty much the same as Coke’s, but with pictures of diverse people and written text claiming they accept everyone. Days after President Donald Trump announced his travel ban, Budweiser showed the harrowing immigrant story of their German co-founder, Adolphus Busch. And finally, Audi’s daughter ad with a father concerned that his daughter would not be treated fairly in a soapbox derby race full of boys aired in 2017.

The right has also had their share of ads like the Servant Foundation’s “He Gets Us” campaign with the message that Jesus loves them, and a string of patriotic ads like the NFL’s Ragged Old Flag in 2020, and Chrysler’s 2012 “It’s Halftime in America” commercial starring Clint Eastwood. But probably the most notable is from 2002, when Budweiser’s famous Clydesdales kneeled to honor the victims of 9/11. With no dialogue, the reverent Budweiser commercial aired only once.

While the first Super Bowl was in 1967, most consider the first famous Super Bowl commercial came a few years later in 1973. The ad was for Noxzema Shaving Cream and the company cracked at least one successful code by using celebrities to push their products. This particular ad had Farrah Fawcett from Charlie’s Angels smearing shaving cream all over the face of New York Jets quarterback Joe Namath with the tagline, “Let Noxzema cream your face.” The line might not get past censors today, but it opened the door to famous football players and models—think “Mean” Joe Green or Cindy Crawford.

Finally, it should be noted that the 1973 Noxzema commercial cost a whopping $42,000, (roughly $288,000 today) while 30-second spots for this year’s game ran for around a measly $7 million. Yet, as more than 100 million consumers were expected to tune in, for companies with the means, it is worth it. If Super Bowl commercials can stand out, advertisers’ brands become immortal.

 James Finck is a professor of history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He may be reached at HistoricallySpeaking1776@gmail.com.