A plaque remaining from the Big Apple Night Club at West 135th Street and Seventh Avenue in Harlem.

Above, a 1934 plaque from the Big Apple Night Club at West 135th Street and Seventh Avenue in Harlem. Discarded as trash in 2006. Now a Popeyes fast food restaurant on Google Maps.

Recent entries:
“Can anyone tell me what oblivious means? I have no idea” (7/21)
“Sundays were made for good coffee, good music, and being lazy with the people you love” (7/21)
“The people who currently own this world don’t care which ruler you choose. They care only that you keep choosing to be ruled” (7/21)
“I tried memeing less, but it made my days memeingless” (7/21)
“I tried memeing less, but it made my day memeingless” (7/21)
More new entries...

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z

Entry from July 16, 2010
October Surprise

An “October surprise” is a surprise event occurring just before a November election (usually a presidential election) that is intended to sway voters. The “October surprise” usually occurs in October, but it can occur in September or in even November (days before an election).
In 1980, there was a U.S. presidential election between Jimmy Carter (the president, a Democrat) and Ronald Reagan (a Republican, who won the election). The Iranian hostage crisis was an important election issue, and Reagan’s advisers feared that the American hostages would be released just before the election and that Jimmy Carter would get credit for it. In a Jack Anderson syndicated political column from June 10, 1980, the term “October surprise” appeared for the first time.
The Wikipedia (below) cites a 1972 “October surprise,” but the term was not used at that time.
Wikipedia: October Surprise
In American political jargon, an October surprise is a news event with the potential to influence the outcome of an election, particularly one for the U.S. presidency. The reference to the month of October is because the Tuesday after the first Monday in November is the date for national elections (as well as many state and local elections), and therefore events that take place in late October have greater potential to influence the decisions of prospective voters.
The term came into use shortly after the 1972 presidential election between Republican incumbent Richard Nixon and Democrat George McGovern, when the United States was in the fourth year of negotiations to end the very long and domestically divisive Vietnam War. Twelve days before the election day of November 7, on October 26, 1972, the United States’ chief negotiator, the presidential National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, appeared at a press conference held at the White House and announced, “We believe that peace is at hand”. Nixon, despite having vowed to end the unpopular war during his presidential election campaign four years earlier, had failed to either cease hostilities or gradually bring about an end to the war. Nixon was nevertheless already widely considered to be assured of an easy reelection victory against McGovern, but Kissinger’s “peace is at hand” declaration may have increased Nixon’s already high standing with the electorate. In the event, Nixon outpolled McGovern in every state except Massachusetts and achieved a 20 point lead in the nationwide popular vote. The fighting ended in 1973, but the last soldiers didn’t leave Vietnam until 1975.
Since that election, the term “October surprise” has been used preemptively during campaign season by partisans of one side to discredit late-campaign news by the other side.
1980 Carter vs. Reagan
Main article: October surprise conspiracy theory

During the Iran hostage crisis, the Republican challenger Ronald Reagan feared a last-minute deal to release the hostages, which might earn incumbent Jimmy Carter enough votes to win re-election in the 1980 presidential election.[2][3] As it happened, in the days prior to the election, press coverage was consumed with the Iranian government’s decision—and Carter’s simultaneous announcement—that the hostages would not be released until after the election.
It was first written about in a Jack Anderson article in the Washington Post in the fall of 1980, in which he alleged that the Carter administration was preparing a major military operation in Iran for rescuing U.S. hostages in order to help him get reelected. Subsequent allegations surfaced against Reagan alleging that his team had impeded the hostage release to negate the potential boost to the Carter campaign.
After the release of the hostages on the same day, literally 5 minutes following Reagan’s inauguration on January 20, 1981, some charged that the Reagan campaign made a secret deal with the Iranian government whereby the Iranians would hold the hostages until Reagan was inaugurated, ensuring that Carter would lose the election.
Gary Sick, member of the National Security council under Presidents Ford and Carter (before being relieved of his duties mere weeks into Reagan’s term) made the accusation in a New York Times editorial in the run-up to the 1992 election. The initial bipartisan response from Congress was skeptical: House Democrats refused to authorize an inquiry, and Senate Republicans denied a $600,000 appropriation for a probe.

Eight former hostages also sent an open letter demanding an inquiry in 1991 In subsequent Congressional testimony, Sick said that the popular media had distorted and misrepresented the accusers, reducing them to “gross generalizations” and “generic conspiracy theorists.” Sick penned a book on the subject and sold the movie rights to it for a reported $300,000. His sources and thesis were contested by a number of commentators on both sides of the aisle.
Bani-Sadr, the former President of Iran, has also stated “that the Reagan campaign struck a deal with Teheran to delay the release of the hostages in 1980,” asserting that “by the month before the American Presidential election in November 1980, many in Iran’s ruling circles were openly discussing the fact that a deal had been made between the Reagan campaign team and some Iranian religious leaders in which the hostages’ release would be delayed until after the election so as to prevent President Carter’s re-election” He repeated the charge in “My Turn to Speak: Iran, the Revolution & Secret Deals with the U.S.”
Two separate congressional investigations looked into the charges, both concluding that there was no plan to seek to delay the hostages’ release. At least three books have argued the case.
(Oxford English Dictionary)
October surprise n. [alluding to the release in October 1980 of U.S. hostages held in Tehran, and seen as likely to boost support for the Carter administration before the November election] U.S. Polit. any political event (apparently) orchestrated just before an election in order to influence the electorate.
1980 N.Y. Times 1 Sept. A7/1 Republicans worry about an ‘*October surprise’ in foreign policy.
2000 U.S. News & World Rep. (Electronic ed.) 25 Sept., Of course, President Clinton could spring his own counter ‘October Surprise’. He could take Verleger’s advice and announce a big pre-election release of oil from the strategic reserves.
Google News Archive
10 June 1980, Lewiston (ME) Daily Sun, Jack Anderson syndicated Washington column, pg. 4, col. 6:
The biggest fear in Ronald Reagan’s inner circle right now is that Jimmy Carter will get an unexpected boost in the election campaign from an “October surprise.” Reagan’s advisers worry that a startling news developemtn like last year’s “November surprise,” the Tehran hostage seizure, will rally support around a beleaguered president.
Google News Archive
17 July 1980, St. Petersburg (FL) Times, “Conspiracies” by Jack W. Germond and Jules Witcover, pg. 20A, col. 3:
DETROIT—You have to wonder whether Ronald Reagan’s campaign manager, William Casey, was sleeping under a tree during the Watergate years. How else can you explain his saying, as he did here the other day, that he’s setting up “an intelligence operation” to keep “an incumbency watch” on President Carter to guard against “an October surprise” by him to win the election?
Google News Archive
24 July 1980, Nashua (NH) Telegraph, “Reagan plans his defense first” by Donald Lambro (UPI), pg. 2, col. 5:
Nofziger and Reagan and his advisers are anticpating “an October surprise” from Carter, indicating they fear Carter would “manage to come up with something either in the domestic or foreign policy area” to swing the November election to his advantage.
OCLC WorldCat record
October Surprise
Author: Osrin, Ray
Publisher: Plain Dealer (firm) 1980-10-26
Edition/Format: Downloadable computer file
Summary: Editorial cartoon by Ray Osrin of a tavern full of elephants. In between some of the elephants at the bar is a very small Jimmy Carter. One of the elephants is saying “Oh, pardon me, Percy…but did I hear the gentleman ask for an ‘October Surprise’? The cartoon is signed and dated in the lower right corner ” 1980 The Plain Dealer Osrin Inter-Continental Press Syndicate 10/26.”
OCLC WorldCat record
October surprise : America’s hostages in Iran and the election of Ronald Reagan
Author: Gary Sick
Publisher: New York, N.Y. Times Books, Random House 1991
OCLC WorldCat record
The “October Surprise” allegations and the circumstances surrounding the release of the American hostages held in Iran : report of the Special Counsel to Senator Terry Sanford and Senator James M. Jeffords of the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate.
Publisher: Washington : U.S. G.P.O. : For sale by the U.S. G.P.O., Supt. of Docs., Congressional Sales Office, 1992.

Posted by Barry Popik
New York CityGovernment/Law/Military/Religion /Health • Friday, July 16, 2010 • Permalink

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.