The long history of the “October surprise”

Tthe specter of a possible “October Surprise” looms over Kamala Harris and Donald Trump as they race toward the end of the White House race. William Safire, Richard Nixon’s speechwriter turned New Yorker Times columnist, once defined an “October surprise” as “(l)ast-minute disruption before the elections.” Recent examples include a 2016 audio tape of Trump discussing groping women and the 2020 Hunter Biden laptop story.

The history of the October surprise, although considered a feature of modern politics, dates back to the end of the 19th century. Then, as now, embarrassing revelations, last-minute disclosures or misguided rhetoric threatened to change the outcome of a hard-fought presidential campaign. A letter published in October 1880 under the forged signature of Republican candidate James A. Garfield appeared to support the use of Chinese immigrant labor. Republicans exposed the letter as a fraud, and in the fall, Garfield retained his victory.

In 1884, there was a surprise when, in late October, a group of religious leaders endorsed Republican candidate James G. Blaine. That support was overshadowed by a reckless rhetorical display that offended key voting blocs the GOP candidate was courting in his campaign against the Democratic nominee, New York Gov. Grover Cleveland.

Read more: Why we may not know the winner on election night

Blaine, a former House speaker and U.S. senator, was a well-known but controversial figure. Admirers have hailed him as the Republican Party’s “feathered knight” for his ability to thwart Democrats. Critics called him a “continental liar” who used his power for personal gain.

In 1876, Blaine was the leading Republican presidential candidate until the publication of the “Mulligan Letters” – correspondence detailing Blaine’s involvement in investing in a railroad in Arkansas, which he assisted while he was speaker. The Mulligan Letters, named after the corresponding accountant, derailed Blaine’s nomination and haunted him for the rest of his career.

Blaine was unsuccessful in his bid for the Republican nomination in 1880, but he continued to serve as Secretary of State under Garfield. In 1884, Blaine finally won his party’s nomination for president, but reform-minded Republicans – derided as “fools” – rushed to Cleveland.

While Blaine had been at the forefront of Republican Party politics for decades, Cleveland was a newcomer with a reputation for honesty. As governor, he challenged the power of New York’s Democratic bosses and worked with reform-minded legislators in Albany, including Republican Theodore Roosevelt.

However, Cleveland’s image suffered when a Buffalo newspaper reported in July that he had fathered a child out of wedlock before becoming governor. Cleveland famously urged fans to “tell the truth” about the episode, but some of Cleveland’s allies went on the attack. They alleged that Blaine falsified the date of his marriage to cover up premarital sex, which led to the birth of his first son, who died in infancy. Blaine explained his side of the story in a letter to a supporter, but as historian Mark Wahlgren Summers noted, this only made the story front-page news.

With character issues dominating the campaign, Blaine needed the blessing of the religious leaders he met on October 29 at the Fifth Avenue Hotel in New York. Taking Blaine’s hand, the Reverend Samuel D. Burchard pledged the clergy’s support with shots at Blaine’s critics and veiled allusions to Cleveland’s private life.

“Regardless of all the slander that has been hurled against you in the newspapers, we stand by you,” Burchard said. “We have greater expectations, which is that you will become president of the United States and that you will honor your name, the United States and the high office that you will hold.”

But Burchard went too far. He questioned Democrats’ temperance and patriotism and used the nativist euphemism for Catholicism to denigrate the faith of immigrant voters, especially Irish Catholics.

“We are Republicans and we do not propose leaving our party and identifying with the party whose predecessors were rum, Romanism and rebellion. We are loyal to the flag and we are loyal to you.”

Blaine stood silent after Burchard’s declaration. In the years that followed, Blaine – like many historians – suggested that he had not heard what Burchard had said. But months after the election, Blaine confided to Supreme Court Justice John Harlan that he remained silent because he believed Burchard’s provocative declaration would be overlooked.

This was a catastrophic miscalculation. Democratic newspapers in New York immediately published Burchard’s statement. Burchard insulted Catholics by calling their faith “Romanism.” Brooklyn Eagle – it thundered the next day, knowing that the phrase “offends a large number of Christians.” The newspaper said it further linked the slander to Catholicism “with intemperance, which it calls ‘rum,’ and with ‘rebellion,’ to suppress which multitudes of Catholic Irishmen gave their lives.”

It took two days for Blaine to dismiss Burchard’s comments. Meanwhile, Democrats sent them across the country. “If Cleveland chooses anything, it will be these words,” predicted Arthur P. Gorman, Cleveland’s campaign manager.

Burchard’s remarks proved particularly problematic for Blaine in New York, where Blaine’s managers believed the election would be decided by voters. To maintain the Empire State, Blaine courted Irish Catholics and hoped to exploit the dissatisfaction of New York’s Democratic bosses with Cleveland.

Blaine’s failure to quickly distance himself from Burchard wasn’t the only mistake he made that day. Blaine attended a lavish dinner at Delmonico’s with millionaires including Andrew Carnegie and Jay Gould. The lavish gathering made national headlines and permanently cemented Blaine’s reputation as a servant of moneyed interests.

Read more: Joe Biden meets with the pope as tensions with Catholics rise at home

But Burchard’s inflammatory alliteration proved particularly damaging, dampening enthusiasm for Blaine in New York among disaffected Democrats and Irish Catholic voters, Summers and historian Robert D. Marcus conclude. An immediate and forceful repudiation of Burchard’s comments could have minimized the damage. In fact, Blaine lost New York by 1,047 votes and became the first Republican to lose a presidential election since John Frémont in 1856.

After the election, Blaine cited his clergy supporter’s ill-chosen remarks as a significant factor in his defeat. “The Lord,” Blaine admitted to Republican journalist Murat Halstead, “has sent an ass upon us in the form of a preacher.”

As Harris and Trump rush toward the end of the campaign, they would do well to expect the unexpected. October’s surprise came in the age of the telegraph and steam engine, but its potential to change the outcome of a close election remains as relevant as today’s headlines.

Robert B. Mitchell is a retired Washington Post news editor and author of the upcoming issue Partisans: James G. Blaine, Roscoe Conkling, and the Politics of Competition and Revenge in the Gilded Age (Edinborough Press).

Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.