Brainstorming Idea for 1876 Election and Beyond

DominusNovus

Inspired somewhat by these threads:

WI: Hayes wins 1876 election without having to compromise with the South

Say Hayes wins the Presidency on election day, and not after disputing the election. There's no electoral commission and there's no need for the Compromise of 1877. How does this affect history? For this to happen, Hayes needs to get at least 19 more electoral votes than he did OTL. If that...
www.alternatehistory.com

For The People; What if Hayes Won Bigger?

What if, in 1876, Rutherford B. Hayes won by a bigger margin and the compromise of 1876 didn't happen? Would Reconstruction still have continued? How would it have affected America? Sample chapter: The results came in. Despite everything, Hayes pulled off a win. This happened due to the...
www.alternatehistory.com

Big GOP Victory in 1876

What if the Republicans had won Indiana, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut in the 1876 election, thus cementing their win without needing to make any sort of deals with the Democrats?
www.alternatehistory.com
And background info:
en.wikipedia.org

1876 United States presidential election - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Let us assume that Hayes wins IN, CT, and NY. That gives him 241 EVs, if you include SC, LA, and FL. Those southern states can be set aside, if need be, but Hayes still wins commandingly. Let us also assume that he does extend some concessions to the South - perhaps some industrial legislation, as was nominally part of the historical Compromise of 1877 - but that US troops are not completely withdrawn from the South just yet.

Now, the GOP still managed to win 1880, with Garfield and Arthur. But let's throw a big variable in here: suppose that Hayes' unwillingness to completely end Reconstruction gets him assassinated by some disgruntled Southerner, around 1879 or 1880. It could be because of his constant veto'ing of the Democrats' attempt to end the Enforcement Acts, or because they are upset he's still not ended Reconstruction completely (he did say he wanted to withdraw troops even before the election of 1876). Whatever the case is, you get President Wheeler for, at least, a year or so. Maybe the sympathy is enough that Wheeler gets the nod for 1880, or maybe its still Garfield/Arthur. I'd suggest Wheeler/Garfield. I like Garfield.

Regardless of who the GOP nominee is, the Republicans win 1880 with somewhere around an extra 30 electoral votes (just taking all the close states and tipping them to the GOP, but if there's still any federal troops in the South, the GOP might get SC, LA, or FL again).

Alright, now what happens?
 

Mikestone8

DominusNovus said:
if there's still any federal troops in the South, the GOP might get SC, LA, or FL again).
Click to expand...

LA and SC maybe- not FL.

Iirc the case in FL differed from the other two. In LA and SC both parties claimed to have won the State elections, so the issue was which State government was entitled to submit the Electoral vote. In FL, there was no such dispute. The State Supreme Court, though made up of Republican appointees, ruled that the Democrats had won. The only issue was whether the Electoral vote should be sent in by the outgoing Republican government or the incoming Democratic one. As the Republican return had been submitted at the proper time, while the Democratic one had not, the Republican vote was counted.

Clearly, however, this issue would not arise in future elections. Florida had been Redeemed in 1876 and would stay Redeemed, so in 1880 et seq it's vote would be Democratic, Thus in 1884, other things being equal, Cleveland still wins even if LA and SC vote for Blaine - supposing the Republicans there can somehow hang on to power that long
 

DominusNovus

Mikestone8 said:
LA and SC maybe- not FL.

Iirc the case in FL differed from the other two. In LA and SC both parties claimed to have won the State elections, so the issue was which State government was entitled to submit the Electoral vote. In FL, there was no such dispute. The State Supreme Court, though made up of Republican appointees, ruled that the Democrats had won. The only issue was whether the Electoral vote should be sent in by the outgoing Republican government or the incoming Democratic one. As the Republican return had been submitted at the proper time, while the Democratic one had not, the Republican vote was counted.

Clearly, however, this issue would not arise in future elections. Florida had been Redeemed in 1876 and would stay Redeemed, so in 1880 et seq it's vote would be Democratic, Thus in 1884, other things being equal, Cleveland still wins even if LA and SC vote for Blaine - supposing the Republicans there can somehow hang on to power that long
Click to expand...

I’d say thats likely fair - the GOP (including Johnson) would have held the White House for 24 years by that point.

Do you see any other butterflies from a more legitimate but assassinated Hayes? Could that derail reconciliation a bit - two Republican presidents assassinated by angry southerners in a decade and a half?
 

Mikestone8

DominusNovus said:
Do you see any other butterflies from a more legitimate but assassinated Hayes? Could that derail reconciliation a bit - two Republican presidents assassinated by angry southerners in a decade and a half?
Click to expand...

Not so's you'd notice.

Most voters were tired of the endless wrangling over Reconstruction and wanted to end it. The killing would have been seen as the action of a solitary fanatic, because that's how most people would have *wanted* to see it.

Conversely they *did* want to believe in the wickedness of Those Dreadful Carpetbaggers, because believing that gave them an excuse to unload themselves of the tiresome Reconstruction business.

You might compare it with the dolchstoss legend in Germany. Any German who'd been at the Front in late 1918 knew perfectly well that it wasn't true, but it was what they wanted to believe, and so they did - inconvenient facts notwithstanding.
 

Wendell

DominusNovus said:
Eh... he might have repented, but I don't like the idea of an ex-Confederate general that close to the Presidency. It would certainly be an interesting discussion on its own merits.
Click to expand...
Understandable, but there's your possible motivation for someone to dispense with Hayes without Reconstruction ending.
 

Mikestone8

DominusNovus said:
How would you see that playing out?
Click to expand...

What's to play out?

By Nov 1876 Reconstruction isn't ending, it's *ended*, bar a couple of states where Republican governments are clinging on by their fingernails. Even if those survive a little loner, what does it signify?
 

Wendell

DominusNovus said:
How would you see that playing out?
Click to expand...
Well, like, for example, the proponents of the Lost Cause narrative detested Longstreet, and sought to diminish his record in the war. It's not clear to me though how much the lost cause narrative had a following among rank and file southern whites in the 1870's though. Perhaps we see a POD in 1874 with Longstreet running for and winning the governorship of Louisiana as a Republican. In OTL, he had the respect of Grant, Hayes, and McKinley. Let's say he does reasonably well, and then ends up on the ticket in 1876. Perhaps enough rank and file veterans of the Confederate army like/respect the general enough to go ahead and vote for the Hayes/Longstreet ticket. Then, some disgruntled former rebel or Guiteau type decides to off Hayes circa 1878 with Reconstruction still breaking down but not completely over, and the net effect is for the elevated Longstreet to resume/strengthen federal occupation in the South and the freedman's bureau.
 
Last edited:

Doesntmatter

Wendell said:
Well, like, for example, the proponents of the Lost Cause narrative detested Longstreet, and sought to diminish his record in the war. It's not clear to me though how much the lost cause narrative had a following among rank and file southern whites in the 1870's though. Perhaps we see a POD in 1874 with Longstreet running for and winning the governorship of Louisiana as a Republican. In OTL, he had the respect of Grant, Hayes, and McKinley. Let's say he does reasonably well, and then ends up on the ticket in 1876. Perhaps enough rank and file veterans of the Confederate army like/respect the general enough to go ahead and vote for the Hayes/Longstreet ticket. Then, some disgruntled former rebel or Guiteau type decides to off Hayes circa 1878 with Reconstruction still breaking down but not completely over, and the net effect is for the elevated Longstreet to resume/strengthen federal occupation in the South and the freedman's bureau.
Click to expand...

I don't know how plausible that it but I do love a good redemption arc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top