The differences between first-degree and second-degree murder can seem subtle. Both are forms of homicide, which is “the act of taking someone’s life through murder” (“Homicide”). Also, in both types of murder, the perpetrator intentionally killed the victim. First-degree murder happens when the perpetrator planned in advance to kill someone. He or she wanted to murder someone else, made a plan, and carried out the act. Usually, he or she then tried to cover up the murder. Second-degree murder happens when the alleged killer was in the act of committing another crime, but he or she did not plan in advance to murder the victim. For example, a burglar commits second-degree murder if he intentionally kills a security guard who discovers him committing the crime. In this case, the burglar did not set out to kill the security guard, but he did it with intention once he was discovered. Second-degree murder might occur as a result of arson, rape, robbery, or kidnapping.

Americans could no longer ignore the urgency of the situation, and Congress passed the Neutrality Act of 1939, which allowed the sale of weapons to the Allied powers involved in the war. However, isolationist sentiment was still strong, and U.S. citizens spanning political parties and social identities joined the America First Committee (AFC) to lobby for the U.S. to build up its defenses and avoid involvement. They argued that a policy of neutrality, a strong army, and the natural boundaries created by the Atlantic and Pacific would protect America from enemy fire. The AFC actively recruited citizens to its position through news articles, radio broadcasts, and large political gatherings.

Famous isolationists include Aviator Charles Lindbergh, who was one of the featured speakers. In 1941, he delivered this address: “We are assembled here tonight because we believe in an independent destiny for America. Such a destiny does not mean that we will build a wall around our country and isolate ourselves from contact with the rest of the world. But it does mean that the future of America will not be tied to these eternal wars in Europe. It means that American boys will not be sent across the ocean to die so that England or Germany or France or Spain may dominate the other nations.”

Another example of an isolationist was US Senator Burton K. Wheeler, a progressive and a pacifist for several reasons. He was raised by a Quaker mother and was deeply impacted by his experiences in Montana as an attorney in WWI when the state banned public demonstrations and restricted the free speech of citizens opposed to the war. He also felt concerned that America was pivoting to be the “world’s policeman.”  Wheeler asserted that Britain could fight the war alone and openly voiced his support of their campaign to stop Hitler – just as long as the U.S. was not involved.

On the other hand, Interventionists argued that protecting Western European democracies, would ultimately protect American from Nazi Germany’s reach. If all of Europe fell, the entire continent would remain under the power of a Fascist dictator, who would control all commerce and negotiations with the U.S. Although America was protected by the oceans, it would be isolated from trade. President Franklin D. Roosevelt explained that it would be like “living at the point of a gun.” In counter to the AFC, interventionists created The Committee to Defend America by Aiding the Allies, which focused at “awakening the people of this country to the perils which confront them.” In a rally in New York City, prominent interventionists Edgar Ansel Mowrer, a foreign reporter; Ferdinand Percora, a New York Supreme Court Justice, and Tallulah Bankkead, an actress, buried the heads of two stuffed ostriches at the beach to illustrate FDR’s claim that Wheeler and Lindbergh were sticking their heads in the sand.

Among the interventionists, were several pro-British groups, and the CDAAA was the most prominent. They advocated to repeal the Neutrality Acts in order to supply Britain with goods and military arms. Willian Allen White, a news editor and author, was the chair of the CDAA. During an interview with the Chicago Daily News, he asserted: “Here is a life and death struggle for every principle we cherish in America: For freedom of speech, of religion, of the ballot and of every freedom that upholds the dignity of the human spirit… Here all the rights that common man has fought for during a thousand years are menaced… The time has come when we must throw into the scales the entire moral and economic weight of the United States on the side of the free peoples of Western Europe who are fighting the battle for a civilized way of life.”

Hoover assumed at first that Roosevelt would be easy to defeat, confident that he could never carry the eastern states and the business vote. He was sorely mistaken. Everywhere he went, Hoover was met with antagonism; anti-Hoover signs and protests were the norm. Hoover’s public persona declined rapidly. Many news accounts reported that he seemed physically unwell, with an ashen face and shaking hands. Often, he seemed as though he would faint, and an aide constantly remained nearby with a chair in case he fell. In contrast, Roosevelt thrived on the campaign. He commented, “I have looked into the faces of thousands of Americans, and they have the frightened look of lost children.”

The election results that November were never really in question: With three million more people voting than in 1928, Roosevelt won by a popular count of twenty-three million to fifteen million. He carried all but six states while winning over 57 percent of the popular vote. Whether they voted due to animosity towards Hoover for his relative inactivity, or out of hope for what Roosevelt would accomplish, the American public committed themselves to a new vision. Historians identify this election as the beginning of a new Democratic coalition, bringing together African Americans, other ethnic minorities, and organized labor as a voting bloc upon whom the party would rely for many of its electoral victories over the next fifty years. Unlike some European nations where similar challenges caused democratic constitutions to crumble and give way to radical ideologies and authoritarian governments, the Roosevelt administration changed the nation’s economic fortunes with reforms, preserved the constitution, and expanded rather than limited the reach of democratic principles into the market economy. As a result, radical alternatives, such as the Fascist movement or Communist Party, remained on the margins of the nation’s political culture.