Another Word on the 2016 Election Plenary Sessions at the AHA in Denver

Last night I was following the tweets from first plenary session of the 2017 Annual Meeting of the American Historical Association in Denver.  The session was titled “The First Hundred Days: Priorities for a New US President.”  It featured some very fine historians of American politics, U.S. foreign relations, and global economics.  Thanks to all who tweeted.

I know that the AHA can only squeeze so many panelists on the stage in a session like this, but as I read the tweets I (along with others) could not help but react:

Let’s be fair to the American Historical Association.  I am sure that this panel was planned well in advance of the November election.  Sean Wilentz, one of the panelists, even joked about it:

Another member of the panel, Margaret O’Mara, tweeted:

On the other hand, one could argue that questions of rural life, religion, populism, conservatism, and yes, gender and immigration, were prevalent in this presidential campaign from the beginning.

And that leads us to my thoughts on Saturday night’s plenary on the election.  This one, as I understand it, was added much later.  I look forward to reading the twitter coverage.