Final answer:
The political elite reacted negatively to Andrew Jackson's election, worried about his populist tactics and the potential chaos his presidency could bring. His victory marked a shift from elite-centered politics to mass political parties, and despite his anti-corruption platform, his tenure was marked by the implementation of the spoils system.
Step-by-step explanation:
The reactions of the political elite to Jackson's election to the presidency were largely negative, indicating disdain for his populist approach and apprehension toward his disregard for traditional political norms. Jackson utilized an anti-elitism stance to combat the small circle of Eastern elites who were commonly involved in the political realm. His victory, with a commanding majority, signaled a shift from the small elite political parties to the mass political parties we see in the United States today. He was seen by his supporters as a hero of the common man, a narrative bolstered by rumors and accusations that only increased his appeal among voters. Conversely, his opponents viewed his tactics and his followers as a sign of chaos and moral decline in politics.
Following Jackson's inauguration, a wild celebration at the White House left many concerned that Jackson's leadership would bring mayhem, a fear that was not unwarranted considering the future instances of corruption and the eventual implementation of the spoils system.
Furthermore, the Democratic-Republicans' alleged 'corrupt bargain' helped catalyze the fall of John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay, as Jackson used it to highlight the cronyism in Washington politics. Jackson's portrayal as a fighter against elitism and his promises to eradicate corruption galvanized his base, but ironically, his presidency was characterized by rewarding loyal followers with government jobs, continuing and amplifying the very cronyism he vowed to combat.