Did Mark Hanna want to be President?

Mark Hanna, as you know, was a close friend of William McKinley and the chief strategist (as well as a financier) behind many of his political ventures. Hanna apparently loved to play kingmaker - before he backed McKinley in 1896 he, together with McKinley, backed John Sherman of Ohio for the GOP nomination in 1888.

In his later life, Hanna was greatly opposed to Theodore Roosevelt. In fact, Hanna had been considering a run for the White House in 1904 to challenge Roosevelt; he died before anything could transpire.

I ask you not just whether he would have run for president had he lived, but whether he genuinely desired the office or desired simply to place people (Sherman, McKinley) in it or bar people he objected to (Foraker, Roosevelt) from it.
 
From what I know about him, he preferred to run things from behind the curtain. In some ways, that method allows for a greater accumulation of power for one individual.
 
To add to the power-behind-the-throne thesis, at the time (late 1890s), the presidency had nowhere near the prestige it came to have: most authority was exercised at the opposite end of Pennsylvania Avenue. With the possible exception of Grover Cleveland, the presidency between Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt was a succession of largely forgettable relatively weak presidents (the "bearded Ohioans", as I've heard it put). Hanna could have wielded more influence and faced an easier re-election battle in the Senate than he would have as president--and moreover, he could in theory remained a senator as long as he wanted, rather than being subject to the two term tradition.
 
To add to the power-behind-the-throne thesis, at the time (late 1890s), the presidency had nowhere near the prestige it came to have: most authority was exercised at the opposite end of Pennsylvania Avenue. With the possible exception of Grover Cleveland, the presidency between Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt was a succession of largely forgettable relatively weak presidents (the "bearded Ohioans", as I've heard it put). Hanna could have wielded more influence and faced an easier re-election battle in the Senate than he would have as president--and moreover, he could in theory remained a senator as long as he wanted, rather than being subject to the two term tradition.
First off, thank you for replying.

Now, let's envision a scenario where McKinkey survives his assassination attempt, decides to honor the two term tradition, and the search has begun for his successor. Would the Presidency have experienced the same elevation of prestige that it did under Roosevelt? Does Hanna seek the office at this juncture?

Or does McKinley opt for a third term (possibly at Hanna's suggestion)?
 
Now, let's envision a scenario where McKinkey survives his assassination attempt, decides to honor the two term tradition, and the search has begun for his successor. Would the Presidency have experienced the same elevation of prestige that it did under Roosevelt? Does Hanna seek the office at this juncture?

Or does McKinley opt for a third term (possibly at Hanna's suggestion)?
In terms of a successor, the obvious choice would have been another of Hanna's proteges, the recently elected Governor of Ohio Myron Herrick; the problem of course would be that come the time of the Republican Convention, Merrick would have served at best maybe a fourth of his term in office and had little if any prior political experience, so it would be a far harder sell to the convention then McKinley or Sherman had been.

Under no circumstances do I believe that Hanna himself however would seek the office, nor would his health really allow for him to conduct a campaign. The Senator was already fairly sick going into 1903, so he might well have known that he didn't have long and would not have survived a term as President, or potentially have even died on the campaign trail. Ignoring that, he may well have had a lot of difficulty carrying a majority at the convention given his ideological positioning, despite the respect and weight he carried among the Republicans in the US Senate. Ironically, Roosevelt may well be his best bet in terms of a Presidential successor over whom he might have believed he could have some influence over, and with Roosevelt coming into the 1904 season with the benefit of incumbency, he almost certainly would come to some sort of understanding in an effort to secure Hanna's support (much as he did historically so as to prevent the hypothetical Hanna revolt).

And no, I can't see McKinley going for a third term. More than a few Republicans of the era were already throwing a lot of flack at the Democrats for considering putting forward Grover Cleveland again in 1904, and it would have been quite a turnaround for them to all of a sudden be in favor of McKinley running for a third consecutive term (Cleveland could at least claim his terms weren't consecutive). I'm not all that certain that McKinley would want it either as he'd be (66) by the time his third term was up, but I'm no expert on the man.
 
Top