Stolengood
Banned
Just as it says on the tin, folks; Cleveland went twice non-consecutively (and thus screwed up the presidential count), but who else couldn't done it from this time period?
I leave it to you.
I leave it to you.
The obvious one is TR, had he been given the 1912 Republican nomination. Had he been nominated again instead of Taft, the party would not split and his election of Wilson is very likely.
Perhaps Nixon, assuming he wins in 1960, and looses in 64 he could possibly still be back in 68 or 72.
This is for Presidents before 1900, though; TR and Nixon can be dealt with in the other thread I've provided in the After 1900 discussion section.![]()
So... let's list those Presidents who served only one term OTL, and go from there:
...and that's the list. So?
- John Adams
- John Quincy Adams
- Martin Van Buren
- John Tyler
- James K. Polk (who died right after his term)
- Millard Fillmore
- Franklin Pierce
- James Buchanan
- Andrew Johnson (who's pretty much an automatic no-go)
- Rutherford B. Hayes (and, remember, Samuel Tilden was nearly re-nominated in 1880)
- Chester A. Arthur (who died right after his term)
- Benjamin Harrison
![]()
There, fixed it for you.Martin Van Buren. He was the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination in 1844. He even had a majority of the votes at the convention, but could not reach the 2/3 threshold. (There was IIRC a move to repeal the 2/3 rule, which narrowly fell short.)
Well, on the one hand, Polk won in 1844. On the other hand, Van Buren had a bit of a bad reputation when it came to economics and he was anti-expansion.There, fixed it for you.![]()
Now, question is... could he possibly have won? And what would happen then?
This is for Presidents before 1900, though; TR and Nixon can be dealt with in the other thread I've provided in the After 1900 discussion section.![]()
So... let's list those Presidents who served only one term OTL, and go from there:
...and that's the list. So?
- John Adams
- John Quincy Adams
- Martin Van Buren
- John Tyler
- James K. Polk (who died right after his term)
- Millard Fillmore
- Franklin Pierce
- James Buchanan
- Andrew Johnson (who's pretty much an automatic no-go)
- Rutherford B. Hayes (and, remember, Samuel Tilden was nearly re-nominated in 1880)
- Chester A. Arthur (who died right after his term)
- Benjamin Harrison
![]()
Grant. There's been a fair amount of speculation on this board about him succeeding in his 1880 bid for a non-consecutive third term.
Postpone the disintegration of the Whigs by a few years, and Fillmore might win a second non-consecutive term in 1856: he and Fremont combined for 54.6% of the popular vote, so he might have won if the opposition vote hadn't been split.
Martin Van Buren. He was the leading candidate for the Democrat nomination in 1844. He even had a majority of the votes at the convention, but could not reach the 2/3 threshold. (There was IIRC a move to repeal the 2/3 rule, which narrowly fell short.)
Now, that's interesting.![]()
Polk again as POTUS... would he try annexing more of Mexico, then?![]()
Now, that's interesting.![]()
Polk again as POTUS... would he try annexing more of Mexico, then?![]()
...'twas only a hypothetical.Under those circumstances, I can't see him being an effective president second time round. He'd already accomplished everything he set out to, and not to mention the fact that he was dead by that point IOTL.
Polk, IIRC, said he only wanted to have a one-term presidency. He accomplished his goals, retired, and after the shortest retirement of any president (Just over 100 days) died.
Under those circumstances, I can't see him being an effective president second time round. He'd already accomplished everything he set out to, and not to mention the fact that he was dead by that point IOTL.