🗞️ When Lincoln Was the Meme Before Memes Were a Thing

 

Abraham Lincoln: 1860 Currier & Ives Cartoon

Today, AI-generated images of politicians like Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer flood the internet—distorted to provoke outrage or laughter. Their expressions are exaggerated, their gestures twisted, their personas reduced to punchlines. It’s political mockery—digitally enhanced.

But this political tactic isn’t new.

During the 1848 Presidential Campaign, Whig Congressman Abraham Lincoln made a swing through the Northeast giving speeches in support of his party's candidate, General Zachary Taylor. On September 21 he gave a speech in Taunton, Massachusetts. A few days later, a local "Free Soil" critic published a review of Lincoln's speech in the Bristol County Democrat, that read like a 19th-century version of a meme—mocking Lincoln’s voice, his gestures, his facial expressions, and accusing him of dishonesty and ignorance.

“His awkward gesticulations, the ludicrous management of his voice and the comical expression of his countenance…” [1]

The writer tried to dismantle Lincoln's credibility by turning him into a caricature. Lincoln was portrayed as a bumbling, unscrupulous partisan—more showman than statesman. 

THEN he started on Lincoln's speech.

The writer didn't just challenge Lincoln's arguments—he framed Lincoln's defense of General Zachary Taylor, the presidential candidate of the Whig Party, as “reckless,” his metaphors “facetious,” and his logic “stupendous falsehood.” [1]

The Free Soil critic even castigated Lincoln for picking on the Free Soiler's choice, Martin Van Buren:

"To show the recklessness and audacity of the honorable gentleman and the low estimate he had formed of his hearers, it will suffice to give but one specimen. Speaking of Van Buren, he said, 'he (Van Buren) won't have an electoral vote in the nation nor as many as all others in any county in the nation.'" [1][*]

The review was relentless. It accused Lincoln of misrepresenting the Free Soil Party, twisting syllogisms [**], and ignoring constitutional disputes. It even offered a counter-“prosyllogism”[***] to clarify the Free Soil position: Opposition to slavery must rise above party loyalty, and that unity in the North was the only path to abolition.

And yet, even the writer noted that Lincoln’s speech stirred the room. The Taylorites were “in ecstasies” and "the steam was up". Lincoln’s humor, indignation, and passion won the crowd—even as his critics sharpened their pens.

🎭 Politics: The Joke Before the Punchline

What’s striking is how little the political playbook has changed. Whether it’s a newspaper article in 1848, an editorial cartoon in 1860 or an internet meme in 2025, the formula is familiar: exaggerate the face, mock the voice, twist the logic, and question the character. The goal isn’t just to disagree—it’s to discredit.

Lincoln was heckled in print the way Jeffries and Schumer were mischaracterized online by AI. The medium changed. The message didn’t.

But here’s the joke: Lincoln endured it. He kept speaking. He kept joking. And he kept believing that ideas—however awkwardly delivered—could still move people.

Here’s the punchline: They elected his awkward movements, squeaky voice, and “ugly” face president in 1860—and he saved the nation.

I guess the punchline really does come after the joke, eh?

Food for thought.

Mac

[*] In his 1848 speech at Taunton, Massachusetts, Abraham Lincoln predicted that Martin Van Buren would receive no electoral votes in the presidential election. Ironically, Lincoln’s prediction turned out to be accurate—Van Buren did receive zero electoral votes, despite earning over 10% of the popular vote.

[**] A syllogism is a form of logical reasoning where a conclusion is drawn from two connected premises. For example:

• All men are mortal. Abraham Lincoln is a man. Therefore, Abraham Lincoln is mortal.

It’s a classic tool in argumentation—simple, structured, and powerful when used well.

[***] counter-“prosyllogism”—a logical argument built from a chain of syllogisms, each leading to the next, to support a broader conclusion. For example, here's the one the critic used in the newspaper article:

• The abolition of slavery in the territory of the United States can never be accomplished unless the North is united. 
• But the North cannot be united until old party lines are broken down. 
• But these lines cannot be broken down unless every man is willing to sacrifice his attachment to minor questions and make opposition to slavery the leading idea; 
• therefore, we have come out of the old pro-slavery parties and formed the United Party of the North. [1]

📚 Works Cited

[1] "SPEECH AT TAUNTON, MASSACHUSETTS September [21?] 1848". Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln. Volume 2 [Sept. 3, 1848-Aug. 21, 1858]. In the digital collection Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/lincoln2. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed October 1, 2025.