List of US Presidents, 1960 to 2020

TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.
 
Last edited:
I had heard about this thread, but didn’t realise this inspiration for List of U.K. Prime Ministers 1945 - 2020 had such a long history (and contained so many long histories!).

***

TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig) [2]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler’s relationship with many in the Whigs hadn’t been an easy one, however, it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own "manifest-destiny" party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.
 
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig) [2]
1844: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1848: James Buchanan/Jefferson Davis (Democratic)
1848: def. Millard Filmore/Daniel Webster (Whig)

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler’s relationship with many in the Whigs hadn’t been an easy one, however, it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own "manifest-destiny" party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow President Harrison’s footsteps and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spook in favor of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern wigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig part in 48’ actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.
 
Last edited:
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig) [2]
1844: def. Martin van Buren / Andrew Johnson (Democratic)
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [3]
1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig)
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [4]
1848: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated the incumbent Secretary of State James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.
 
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig) [2]
1844: def. Martin van Buren / Andrew Johnson (Democratic)
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [3]
1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig)
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [4]
1848: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)
1856: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [5]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American)

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. However, while Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromise, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

OOC: I edited the small slip of Buchanan from Secretary of State to Senator as that is most likely what his position would have been in this TL. I tried to put a spin on OTL 1856 election and I hope I've been successful, but please point out any major inadvertent errors - I won't be offended. I also wanted to use a better word than "vote-splitting" in my most recent update as it sounds too 'modern' to my ears but I just couldn't think of one, so also feel free to point out some more acceptable alternatives!
 
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig) [2]
1844: def. Martin van Buren / Andrew Johnson (Democratic)
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [3]
1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig)
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [4]
1848: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)
1856: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [5]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American)
1860: Stephan A. Douglas/Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward/Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge/Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont/Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick/None (Democratic)

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. However, while Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromise, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as diehard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick unenthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...
 
Last edited:
I think it was a bit ambitious of me to attempt a Contingent Election for my first attempt at this American list, but here it goes!

TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig) [2]
1844: def. Martin van Buren / Andrew Johnson (Democratic)
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [3]
1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig)
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [4]
1848: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)
1856: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [5]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American)
1860: Stephan A. DouglasϮ / Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward/Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge/Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont/Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick / Vacant (Democratic) [6]
1864: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Daniel S. DickinsonϮ (Democratic) ɶ

1864: def. Abraham Lincoln/Cassius Clay (Whig), Benjamin Fitzpatrick/Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Alexander H. Stephens (American)
1866: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Vacant
[7]

Ϯ = died in office
ɶ = Contingent Election

[1]
William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. However, while Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromise, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as diehard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick unenthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...

[7] The 1864 election made the previous one look like a simple warm-up. The first sign was that Fitzpatrick barely got the nomination. He campaigned reluctantly on the grounds that the Democrats were the only party that preserved the Union. However, the division was marked as the election results showed a tri-color map with Whigs in the North, American Party in the South and Democrats a band in the center (plus New York). Even though the Lincoln / Clay ticket won both the popular and the highest vote in the Electoral College, it was not enough to secure a majority, so the country went to a contingent election for the first time since 1824. The outrage spread as the Senate elected Daniel S. Dickinson, while several Democrats defected in the House to vote for John C. Breckinridge. The Whigs claimed a secret "Fusion Agreement" between the two parties, negotiated by Jefferson Davis, but nothing could be done to change the outcome. While some argued that the Whigs had lost because of their abolitionist platform, most hardened in their support, especially after 1866, when Breckinridge had effectively stopped trying to govern for the entire country.
 
Last edited:
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig) [1]
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic)
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig) [2]
1844: def. Martin van Buren / Richard Mentor Johnson (Democratic)
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [3]
1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig)
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig) [4] [5]
1852: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American)
1860: Stephan A. Douglas / Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward / Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge / Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont / Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic) [6]
1864: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic) ɶ [7]

1864: def. Abraham Lincoln / Cassius Clay (Whig), Benjamin Fitzpatrick / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Alexander H. Stephens (American)
1866: John C. Breckinridge (American)

1868: Henry Winter Davis (Whig) / August Belmont (Democratic) ɶ [8]
1868: def. Henry Winter Davis / Lyman Trumbull (Whig), Benjamin Harvey Hill / August Belmont (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Jefferson Davis (American)

= died in office
ɶ = contingent election

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. However, while Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromise, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as diehard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick unenthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...

[7] The 1864 election made the previous one look like a simple warm-up. The first sign was that Fitzpatrick barely got the nomination. He campaigned reluctantly on the grounds that the Democrats were the only party that preserved the Union. However, the division was marked as the election results showed a tri-color map with Whigs in the North, American Party in the South and Democrats a band in the center (plus New York). Even though the Lincoln / Clay ticket won both the popular and the highest vote in the Electoral College, it was not enough to secure a majority, so the country went to a contingent election for the first time since 1824. The outrage spread as the Senate elected Daniel S. Dickinson, while several Democrats defected in the House to vote for John C. Breckinridge. The Whigs claimed a secret 'Fusion Agreement' between the two parties, negotiated by Jefferson Davis, but nothing could be done to change the outcome. While some argued that the Whigs had lost because of their abolitionist platform, most hardened in their support - especially after 1866, when Breckinridge had effectively stopped trying to govern for the entire country.

[8] The 1864 contingent election had been deeply damaging to the country and dramatically intensified the animosity between North and South. However, when the 1868 election also failed to secure a majority for the Whig Party it was clear the tensions would boil over. The radical Whig, Henry Winter Davis, won the North (beginning the long stretch of the 'Solid North') - although with a noticeably smaller margin in the popular vote - but in the following squall Democrats who opposed the long-threatened secession of the South refused to endorse another Breckenridge administration. When Belmont was elected as Vice President the state of Mississippi moved to secede from the United States, supported by the vast majority of the American Party and a smaller number of Democrats. In reality, however, the cause of the South was already lost. Many regard their attempt at secession as several decades too late, as by the 1860s the North was vastly superior in almost every way. The Constitutional Union of American States (CUAS) struggled to get off the ground - it never secured diplomatic recognition from Europe, was riddled with political factionalism and never secured any major military victories due to the ineptitude of the armed forces. However, for four years the 'Southern Insurrection' inflicted grave moral and human tragedies upon the United States - largely due to the sheer bloody-mindedness of the leadership and the guerilla warfare campaigns raging across Dixie. By the time of the 1870 election Davis was able to point towards victory, but it was clear that the country would be greatly scarred by the peace.
 
Not trying to nitpick, and perhaps it is my reading of the two posts but something seems to have gone askew between footnote [8] and [9].
Footnote [8] seemed to suggest the conflict was something closer to a guerrilla campaign than a real war:
The Constitutional Union of American States (CUAS) struggled to get off the ground

By the time of the 1870 election Davis was able to point towards victory, but it was clear that the country would be greatly scarred by the peace.

However, footnote [9] then states:
The American Civil War (1869-1873) was the deadliest conflict to ever strike the United States. For four years the CUAS plagued southern America with constant warfare and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands. With the war coming near a close at the dawn of the 1872 election, President Davis wanted to emphasis the need for unity and Americans to come together.
Shortly before his second inauguration, American troops marched on Richmond, causing CUAS President Breckenridge to finally sign articles of surrender.
which suggests that it was something far bigger and closer to OTL Civil War.

I would like to continue the TL, but I'm stuck writing the next step as it is dependent on the nature of the conflict. Also, I wanted to check something else. Would August Belmont be eligible to serve as President as he was German born (not even arriving in American until 24 years of age)? I don't have any issue with him being VP (or even becoming President) but it probably should be acknowledged (Constitutional Amendment etc).
 
Not trying to nitpick, and perhaps it is my reading of the two posts but something seems to have gone askew between footnote [8] and [9].
Footnote [8] seemed to suggest the conflict was something closer to a guerrilla campaign than a real war:




However, footnote [9] then states:


which suggests that it was something far bigger and closer to OTL Civil War.

I would like to continue the TL, but I'm stuck writing the next step as it is dependent on the nature of the conflict. Also, I wanted to check something else. Would August Belmont be eligible to serve as President as he was German born (not even arriving in American until 24 years of age)? I don't have any issue with him being VP (or even becoming President) but it probably should be acknowledged (Constitutional Amendment etc).
I could delete mine if it doesn’t fit in
 
Would you mind if I write a slightly modified entry? - I'm not trying to bully you out of your turn. I thought it was well written - just as I said, I couldn't wrap my head around the two entries.
Yeah you can if you want
Thanks. I hope you are okay with what I've put below. You can still have your turn now. Like I said before, I think your writing style is good. Very easy to read, so please don't stop! (We could also use your contributions over at List of U.K. Prime Ministers 1945-2020 if you're interested!)

TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig)
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic) [1]
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig)
1844: def. Martin van Buren / Richard Mentor Johnson (Democratic) [2]
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)
1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig) [3]
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig)
1852: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [4]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American) [5]
1860: Stephan A. Douglas
/ Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward / Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge / Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont / Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic) [6]
1864: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic) ɶ

1864: def. Abraham Lincoln / Cassius Clay (Whig), Benjamin Fitzpatrick / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Alexander H. Stephens (American)
1866: John C. Breckinridge (American)
[7]
1868: Henry Winter Davis (Whig) / August Belmont (Democratic) ɶ

1868: def. Henry Winter Davis / Lyman Trumbull (Whig), Benjamin Harvey Hill / August Belmont (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Jefferson Davis (American) [8]
1872: Lyman Trumbull / August Belmont (National Union)

1872: def. James A Bayard Jr. / Benjamin Gratz Brown (Democratic) [9]

= died in office
ɶ = contingent election

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. They also more controversially saw the 13th Amendment passed which defined citizenship, allowing for non-American born citizens to become citizens (and even be eligible for President) but which also explicitly stated that slaves (born in America or otherwise) were not citizens until they had lawfully gained freedom. While Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromises, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as die-hard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick un-enthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...

[7] The 1864 election made the previous one look like a simple warm-up. The first sign was that Fitzpatrick barely got the nomination. He campaigned reluctantly on the grounds that the Democrats were the only party that preserved the Union. However, the division was marked as the election results showed a tri-color map with Whigs in the North, American Party in the South and Democrats a band in the center (plus New York). Even though the Lincoln / Clay ticket won both the popular and the highest vote in the Electoral College, it was not enough to secure a majority, so the country went to a contingent election for the first time since 1824. The outrage spread as the Senate elected Daniel S. Dickinson, while several Democrats defected in the House to vote for John C. Breckinridge. The Whigs claimed a secret 'Fusion Agreement' between the two parties, negotiated by Jefferson Davis, but nothing could be done to change the outcome. While some argued that the Whigs had lost because of their abolitionist platform, most hardened in their support - especially after 1866, when Breckinridge had effectively stopped trying to govern for the entire country.

[8] The 1864 contingent election had been deeply damaging to the country and dramatically intensified the animosity between North and South. However, when the 1868 election also failed to secure a majority for the Whig Party it was clear the tensions would boil over. The radical Whig, Henry Winter Davis, won the North (beginning the long stretch of the 'Solid North') - although with a noticeably smaller margin in the popular vote - but in the following squall Democrats who opposed the long-threatened secession of the South refused to endorse another Breckenridge administration. When Belmont was elected as Vice President the state of Mississippi moved to secede from the United States, supported by the vast majority of the American Party and a smaller number of Democrats. In reality, however, the cause of the South was already lost. Many regard their attempt at secession as several decades too late, as by the 1860s the North was vastly superior in almost every way. The Constitutional Union of American States (CUAS) struggled to get off the ground - it never secured diplomatic recognition from Europe, was riddled with political factionalism and never secured any major military victories due to the ineptitude of the armed forces. However, for four years the 'Southern Insurrection' inflicted grave moral and human tragedies upon the United States - largely due to the sheer bloody-mindedness of the leadership and the guerrilla warfare campaigns raging across Dixie. By the time of the 1870 election Davis was able to point towards victory, but it was clear that the country would be greatly scarred by the peace.

[9] With the collapse of the nascent CUAS, Henry Winter Davis’ popularity was at an all time-high. However, he shocked nearly everyone when he announced that he would follow in the Whig tradition of Harrison and Clay and not stand for reelection. He did enthusiastically support the creation of the National Union Party to reconstruct the country, recommending Benjamin Wade to replace him, but after Wade refused the nomination on account of his advanced years, the nomination went smoothly to Davis' former Whig Vice-Presidential running mate Lyman Trumbull. The Trumbull/Belmont ticket easily swept the country with a number of Southern States boycotting the election and weak opposition from 'Dove Democrats'. The death of Davis the following year at just 55 years led to a rise in “historical counter-factuals” asking “What would have happened if Davis did run again?” due to the possible crisis that could have arisen as some argued that despite the 13th Amendment, Belmont was still constitutionally ineligible to succeed him. (The most popular counter-factual was of course; "What if the South had attempted succession earlier"?) Trumbull pursued a far less radical agenda than Davis, instead focusing on traditional Whig policies like economic programs and creation of the Yellowstone National Park. This led to an unsuccessful impeachment attempt from the Radical Whig faction, in spite of which he still passed the 14th (which outlawed slavery - except as punishment for a crime) and 15th (which partially revoked the 13th Amendment redefining citizenship) Amendments.
 
Last edited:
I would like to continue the TL, but I'm stuck writing the next step as it is dependent on the nature of the conflict. Also, I wanted to check something else. Would August Belmont be eligible to serve as President as he was German born (not even arriving in American until 24 years of age)? I don't have any issue with him being VP (or even becoming President) but it probably should be acknowledged (Constitutional Amendment etc).
My mistake entirely. I had him in as a placeholder and forgot to remove him for a better candidate. Retcon it if you like, or maybe it was the result of a Whig amendment. I'm happy either way. (I think it might have to be snuck in in an earlier footnote than [9] though).
 
My mistake entirely. I had him in as a placeholder and forgot to remove him for a better candidate. Retcon it if you like, or maybe it was the result of a Whig amendment. I'm happy either way. (I think it might have to be snuck in in an earlier footnote than [9] though).
👍I've edited my updates [5] and [9] above to account for Belmont. Looks like the TL is good for continuation!
 
👍I've edited my updates [5] and [9] above to account for Belmont. Looks like the TL is good for continuation!
So is OTL Amendment 13 now 14, 15 is now 16, and so on? Although I suppose we can now make our own amendments.

TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig)
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic) [1]
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig)

1844: def. Martin van Buren / Richard Mentor Johnson (Democratic) [2]
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)

1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig) [3]
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig)

1852: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [4]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American) [5]
1860: Stephan A. Douglas
/ Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward / Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge / Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont / Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic) [6]
1864: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic) ɶ

1864: def. Abraham Lincoln / Cassius Clay (Whig), Benjamin Fitzpatrick / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Alexander H. Stephens (American)
1866: John C. Breckinridge (American)
[7]
1868: Henry Winter Davis (Whig) / August Belmont (Democratic) ɶ

1868: def. Henry Winter Davis / Lyman Trumbull (Whig), Benjamin Harvey Hill / August Belmont (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Jefferson Davis (American) [8]
1872: Lyman Trumbull / August Belmont (National Union)

1872: def. James A Bayard Jr. / Benjamin Gratz Brown (Democratic) [9]
1876: Benjamin Butler / Ambrose Burnside (Radical Whig)

1876: def. Lyman Trumbull / Charles Francis Adams Sr. (Liberal Whig), Benjamin Gratz Brown / John Quincy Adams II (True Democrats) [10]

= died in office
ɶ = contingent election

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. They also more controversially saw the 13th Amendment passed which defined citizenship, allowing for non-American born citizens to become citizens (and even be eligible for President) but which also explicitly stated that slaves (born in America or otherwise) were not citizens until they had lawfully gained freedom. While Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromises, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as die-hard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick un-enthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...

[7] The 1864 election made the previous one look like a simple warm-up. The first sign was that Fitzpatrick barely got the nomination. He campaigned reluctantly on the grounds that the Democrats were the only party that preserved the Union. However, the division was marked as the election results showed a tri-color map with Whigs in the North, American Party in the South and Democrats a band in the center (plus New York). Even though the Lincoln / Clay ticket won both the popular and the highest vote in the Electoral College, it was not enough to secure a majority, so the country went to a contingent election for the first time since 1824. The outrage spread as the Senate elected Daniel S. Dickinson, while several Democrats defected in the House to vote for John C. Breckinridge. The Whigs claimed a secret 'Fusion Agreement' between the two parties, negotiated by Jefferson Davis, but nothing could be done to change the outcome. While some argued that the Whigs had lost because of their abolitionist platform, most hardened in their support - especially after 1866, when Breckinridge had effectively stopped trying to govern for the entire country.

[8] The 1864 contingent election had been deeply damaging to the country and dramatically intensified the animosity between North and South. However, when the 1868 election also failed to secure a majority for the Whig Party it was clear the tensions would boil over. The radical Whig, Henry Winter Davis, won the North (beginning the long stretch of the 'Solid North') - although with a noticeably smaller margin in the popular vote - but in the following squall Democrats who opposed the long-threatened secession of the South refused to endorse another Breckenridge administration. When Belmont was elected as Vice President the state of Mississippi moved to secede from the United States, supported by the vast majority of the American Party and a smaller number of Democrats. In reality, however, the cause of the South was already lost. Many regard their attempt at secession as several decades too late, as by the 1860s the North was vastly superior in almost every way. The Constitutional Union of American States (CUAS) struggled to get off the ground - it never secured diplomatic recognition from Europe, was riddled with political factionalism and never secured any major military victories due to the ineptitude of the armed forces. However, for four years the 'Southern Insurrection' inflicted grave moral and human tragedies upon the United States - largely due to the sheer bloody-mindedness of the leadership and the guerrilla warfare campaigns raging across Dixie. By the time of the 1870 election Davis was able to point towards victory, but it was clear that the country would be greatly scarred by the peace.

[9] With the collapse of the nascent CUAS, Henry Winter Davis’ popularity was at an all time-high. However, he shocked nearly everyone when he announced that he would follow in the Whig tradition of Harrison and Clay and not stand for reelection. He did enthusiastically support the creation of the National Union Party to reconstruct the country, recommending Benjamin Wade to replace him, but after Wade refused the nomination on account of his advanced years, the nomination went smoothly to Davis' former Whig Vice-Presidential running mate Lyman Trumbull. The Trumbull/Belmont ticket easily swept the country with a number of Southern States boycotting the election and weak opposition from 'Dove Democrats'. The death of Davis the following year at just 55 years led to a rise in “historical counter-factuals” asking “What would have happened if Davis did run again?” due to the possible crisis that could have arisen as some argued that despite the 13th Amendment, Belmont was still constitutionally ineligible to succeed him. (The most popular counter-factual was of course; "What if the South had attempted succession earlier"?) Trumbull pursued a far less radical agenda than Davis, instead focusing on traditional Whig policies like economic programs and creation of the Yellowstone National Park. This led to an unsuccessful impeachment attempt from the Radical Whig faction, in spite of which he still passed the 14th (which outlawed slavery - except as punishment for a crime) and 15th (which partially revoked the 13th Amendment redefining citizenship) Amendments.

[10] Trumbull tried to hold the National Union government together, but the Whig radicals made it clear that they would not support what they saw as "Democrats in Whig clothes." While it seemed like an apparent split in the party, it was actually the Democrats who were most disadvantaged, as since they had recently lost credibility, most of their supporters and representatives flocked to Trumbull's Liberal Whig party, leaving only a shell in the True Democrats to participate in the elections. This created an interesting situation in which father and son ran for vice president by opposing parties. However, at the end of the day, the Radical Whigs claimed victory, garnering a great deal of support from the newly liberated black population. While a former South sympathizer, Butler, a lawyer, businessman and former Governor, said his greatest regret was not being able to fight against the Insurrection (his critics argued that Burnside was chosen as a running mate solely because of the uniform, although Burnside had gained his own fame in some easy victories over the weak CUAS forces). While much of his program was blocked by a hostile opposition, Butler implemented not only greater emancipation and suffrage in the Civil Rights Act of 1877 and the 16th Amendment, but also promoted measures such as the nine-hour shift and antitrust laws while continuing "traditional Whig" programs, such as improving public health infrastructure. Shortly before the next election, Butler announced that the Radical Whigs would formalize the Whig tradition within the party of presidents running for single terms only (his critics said alleged financial irregularity had more to do with it, though this had little impact on his popularity).
 
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig)
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic) [1]
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig)

1844: def. Martin van Buren / Richard Mentor Johnson (Democratic) [2]
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)

1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig) [3]
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig)

1852: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [4]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American) [5]
1860: Stephan A. Douglas
/ Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward / Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge / Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont / Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic) [6]
1864: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic) ɶ

1864: def. Abraham Lincoln / Cassius Clay (Whig), Benjamin Fitzpatrick / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Alexander H. Stephens (American)
1866: John C. Breckinridge (American)
[7]
1868: Henry Winter Davis (Whig) / August Belmont (Democratic) ɶ

1868: def. Henry Winter Davis / Lyman Trumbull (Whig), Benjamin Harvey Hill / August Belmont (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Jefferson Davis (American) [8]
1872: Lyman Trumbull / August Belmont (National Union)

1872: def. James A Bayard Jr. / Benjamin Gratz Brown (Democratic) [9]
1876: Benjamin Butler / Ambrose Burnside (Radical Whig)

1876: def. Lyman Trumbull / Charles Francis Adams Sr. (Liberal Whig), Benjamin Gratz Brown / John Quincy Adams II (True Democrats) [10]
1880: James G. Blaine/John Sherman (Whig)

1880: def. Winfield S. Hancock/Hendrick Bradley Wright (Democratic), James B. Weaver/Barzillai J. Chambers (Greenback) [11]


= died in office
ɶ = contingent election

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. They also more controversially saw the 13th Amendment passed which defined citizenship, allowing for non-American born citizens to become citizens (and even be eligible for President) but which also explicitly stated that slaves (born in America or otherwise) were not citizens until they had lawfully gained freedom. While Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromises, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as die-hard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick un-enthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...

[7] The 1864 election made the previous one look like a simple warm-up. The first sign was that Fitzpatrick barely got the nomination. He campaigned reluctantly on the grounds that the Democrats were the only party that preserved the Union. However, the division was marked as the election results showed a tri-color map with Whigs in the North, American Party in the South and Democrats a band in the center (plus New York). Even though the Lincoln / Clay ticket won both the popular and the highest vote in the Electoral College, it was not enough to secure a majority, so the country went to a contingent election for the first time since 1824. The outrage spread as the Senate elected Daniel S. Dickinson, while several Democrats defected in the House to vote for John C. Breckinridge. The Whigs claimed a secret 'Fusion Agreement' between the two parties, negotiated by Jefferson Davis, but nothing could be done to change the outcome. While some argued that the Whigs had lost because of their abolitionist platform, most hardened in their support - especially after 1866, when Breckinridge had effectively stopped trying to govern for the entire country.

[8] The 1864 contingent election had been deeply damaging to the country and dramatically intensified the animosity between North and South. However, when the 1868 election also failed to secure a majority for the Whig Party it was clear the tensions would boil over. The radical Whig, Henry Winter Davis, won the North (beginning the long stretch of the 'Solid North') - although with a noticeably smaller margin in the popular vote - but in the following squall Democrats who opposed the long-threatened secession of the South refused to endorse another Breckenridge administration. When Belmont was elected as Vice President the state of Mississippi moved to secede from the United States, supported by the vast majority of the American Party and a smaller number of Democrats. In reality, however, the cause of the South was already lost. Many regard their attempt at secession as several decades too late, as by the 1860s the North was vastly superior in almost every way. The Constitutional Union of American States (CUAS) struggled to get off the ground - it never secured diplomatic recognition from Europe, was riddled with political factionalism and never secured any major military victories due to the ineptitude of the armed forces. However, for four years the 'Southern Insurrection' inflicted grave moral and human tragedies upon the United States - largely due to the sheer bloody-mindedness of the leadership and the guerrilla warfare campaigns raging across Dixie. By the time of the 1870 election Davis was able to point towards victory, but it was clear that the country would be greatly scarred by the peace.

[9] With the collapse of the nascent CUAS, Henry Winter Davis’ popularity was at an all time-high. However, he shocked nearly everyone when he announced that he would follow in the Whig tradition of Harrison and Clay and not stand for reelection. He did enthusiastically support the creation of the National Union Party to reconstruct the country, recommending Benjamin Wade to replace him, but after Wade refused the nomination on account of his advanced years, the nomination went smoothly to Davis' former Whig Vice-Presidential running mate Lyman Trumbull. The Trumbull/Belmont ticket easily swept the country with a number of Southern States boycotting the election and weak opposition from 'Dove Democrats'. The death of Davis the following year at just 55 years led to a rise in “historical counter-factuals” asking “What would have happened if Davis did run again?” due to the possible crisis that could have arisen as some argued that despite the 13th Amendment, Belmont was still constitutionally ineligible to succeed him. (The most popular counter-factual was of course; "What if the South had attempted succession earlier"?) Trumbull pursued a far less radical agenda than Davis, instead focusing on traditional Whig policies like economic programs and creation of the Yellowstone National Park. This led to an unsuccessful impeachment attempt from the Radical Whig faction, in spite of which he still passed the 14th (which outlawed slavery - except as punishment for a crime) and 15th (which partially revoked the 13th Amendment redefining citizenship) Amendments.

[10] Trumbull tried to hold the National Union government together, but the Whig radicals made it clear that they would not support what they saw as "Democrats in Whig clothes." While it seemed like an apparent split in the party, it was actually the Democrats who were most disadvantaged, as since they had recently lost credibility, most of their supporters and representatives flocked to Trumbull's Liberal Whig party, leaving only a shell in the True Democrats to participate in the elections. This created an interesting situation in which father and son ran for vice president by opposing parties. However, at the end of the day, the Radical Whigs claimed victory, garnering a great deal of support from the newly liberated black population. While a former South sympathizer, Butler, a lawyer, businessman and former Governor, said his greatest regret was not being able to fight against the Insurrection (his critics argued that Burnside was chosen as a running mate solely because of the uniform, although Burnside had gained his own fame in some easy victories over the weak CUAS forces). While much of his program was blocked by a hostile opposition, Butler implemented not only greater emancipation and suffrage in the Civil Rights Act of 1877 and the 16th Amendment, but also promoted measures such as the nine-hour shift and antitrust laws while continuing "traditional Whig" programs, such as improving public health infrastructure. Shortly before the next election, Butler announced that the Radical Whigs would formalize the Whig tradition within the party of presidents running for single terms only (his critics said alleged financial irregularity had more to do with it, though this had little impact on his popularity).

[11] To little surprise the radical faction of Whigs managed to win easy re-election in 1880. They nominated Maine Senator and former House Speaker James Blaine as well as John Sherman as his running mate, the younger brother of General William Tecumseh Sherman. Most so-called "Liberal Whigs" fled back to either the Democrats or Radical Whigs, who were now simply just Whigs. The Democrats nominated who were soundly defeated again outside of the South. There was also the Left-Wing Geenback candidate of James Weaver, a former General and Iowa congressman, but he failed to win any state other than Iowa. President Blaine was a classic Whig, expanding further black suffrage and increasing tariffs. He kept Federal Troops in the South, which were used to ensure the newly passed Suffrage laws stayed enforced and to dissuade any further attempts at secession. However, Blaine began to lose his image in the eyes of the public as his ties to the infamous railroad industry started to come out in the second half of his term. The party was eager to get away from Blaine as they moved to the 84' election as the Democrats started to make gains among voters again.
 
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig)
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic) [1]
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig)

1844: def. Martin van Buren / Richard Mentor Johnson (Democratic) [2]
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)

1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig) [3]
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig)

1852: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [4]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American) [5]
1860: Stephan A. Douglas
/ Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward / Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge / Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont / Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic) [6]
1864: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic) ɶ

1864: def. Abraham Lincoln / Cassius Clay (Whig), Benjamin Fitzpatrick / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Alexander H. Stephens (American)
1866: John C. Breckinridge (American)
[7]
1868: Henry Winter Davis (Whig) / August Belmont (Democratic) ɶ

1868: def. Henry Winter Davis / Lyman Trumbull (Whig), Benjamin Harvey Hill / August Belmont (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Jefferson Davis (American) [8]
1872: Lyman Trumbull / August Belmont (National Union)

1872: def. James A Bayard Jr. / Benjamin Gratz Brown (Democratic) [9]
1876: Benjamin Butler / Ambrose Burnside (Radical Whig)

1876: def. Lyman Trumbull / Charles Francis Adams Sr. (Liberal Whig), Benjamin Gratz Brown / John Quincy Adams II (True Democrats) [10]
1880: James G. Blaine/John Sherman (Whig)

1880: def. Winfield S. Hancock/Hendrick Bradley Wright (Democratic), James B. Weaver/Barzillai J. Chambers (Greenback) [11]
1884
: Thomas A. Hendrick / William H. English (Liberal-Democratic Whig)
1884: def. John Sherman / James B. Weaver (Radical Whig)
1885: William H. English (Liberal-Democratic Whig) [12]
= died in office
ɶ = contingent election

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. They also more controversially saw the 13th Amendment passed which defined citizenship, allowing for non-American born citizens to become citizens (and even be eligible for President) but which also explicitly stated that slaves (born in America or otherwise) were not citizens until they had lawfully gained freedom. While Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromises, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as die-hard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick un-enthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...

[7] The 1864 election made the previous one look like a simple warm-up. The first sign was that Fitzpatrick barely got the nomination. He campaigned reluctantly on the grounds that the Democrats were the only party that preserved the Union. However, the division was marked as the election results showed a tri-color map with Whigs in the North, American Party in the South and Democrats a band in the center (plus New York). Even though the Lincoln / Clay ticket won both the popular and the highest vote in the Electoral College, it was not enough to secure a majority, so the country went to a contingent election for the first time since 1824. The outrage spread as the Senate elected Daniel S. Dickinson, while several Democrats defected in the House to vote for John C. Breckinridge. The Whigs claimed a secret 'Fusion Agreement' between the two parties, negotiated by Jefferson Davis, but nothing could be done to change the outcome. While some argued that the Whigs had lost because of their abolitionist platform, most hardened in their support - especially after 1866, when Breckinridge had effectively stopped trying to govern for the entire country.

[8] The 1864 contingent election had been deeply damaging to the country and dramatically intensified the animosity between North and South. However, when the 1868 election also failed to secure a majority for the Whig Party it was clear the tensions would boil over. The radical Whig, Henry Winter Davis, won the North (beginning the long stretch of the 'Solid North') - although with a noticeably smaller margin in the popular vote - but in the following squall Democrats who opposed the long-threatened secession of the South refused to endorse another Breckenridge administration. When Belmont was elected as Vice President the state of Mississippi moved to secede from the United States, supported by the vast majority of the American Party and a smaller number of Democrats. In reality, however, the cause of the South was already lost. Many regard their attempt at secession as several decades too late, as by the 1860s the North was vastly superior in almost every way. The Constitutional Union of American States (CUAS) struggled to get off the ground - it never secured diplomatic recognition from Europe, was riddled with political factionalism and never secured any major military victories due to the ineptitude of the armed forces. However, for four years the 'Southern Insurrection' inflicted grave moral and human tragedies upon the United States - largely due to the sheer bloody-mindedness of the leadership and the guerrilla warfare campaigns raging across Dixie. By the time of the 1870 election Davis was able to point towards victory, but it was clear that the country would be greatly scarred by the peace.

[9] With the collapse of the nascent CUAS, Henry Winter Davis’ popularity was at an all time-high. However, he shocked nearly everyone when he announced that he would follow in the Whig tradition of Harrison and Clay and not stand for reelection. He did enthusiastically support the creation of the National Union Party to reconstruct the country, recommending Benjamin Wade to replace him, but after Wade refused the nomination on account of his advanced years, the nomination went smoothly to Davis' former Whig Vice-Presidential running mate Lyman Trumbull. The Trumbull/Belmont ticket easily swept the country with a number of Southern States boycotting the election and weak opposition from 'Dove Democrats'. The death of Davis the following year at just 55 years led to a rise in “historical counter-factuals” asking “What would have happened if Davis did run again?” due to the possible crisis that could have arisen as some argued that despite the 13th Amendment, Belmont was still constitutionally ineligible to succeed him. (The most popular counter-factual was of course; "What if the South had attempted succession earlier"?) Trumbull pursued a far less radical agenda than Davis, instead focusing on traditional Whig policies like economic programs and creation of the Yellowstone National Park. This led to an unsuccessful impeachment attempt from the Radical Whig faction, in spite of which he still passed the 14th (which outlawed slavery - except as punishment for a crime) and 15th (which partially revoked the 13th Amendment redefining citizenship) Amendments.

[10] Trumbull tried to hold the National Union government together, but the Whig radicals made it clear that they would not support what they saw as "Democrats in Whig clothes." While it seemed like an apparent split in the party, it was actually the Democrats who were most disadvantaged, as since they had recently lost credibility, most of their supporters and representatives flocked to Trumbull's Liberal Whig party, leaving only a shell in the True Democrats to participate in the elections. This created an interesting situation in which father and son ran for vice president by opposing parties. However, at the end of the day, the Radical Whigs claimed victory, garnering a great deal of support from the newly liberated black population. While a former South sympathizer, Butler, a lawyer, businessman and former Governor, said his greatest regret was not being able to fight against the Insurrection (his critics argued that Burnside was chosen as a running mate solely because of the uniform, although Burnside had gained his own fame in some easy victories over the weak CUAS forces). While much of his program was blocked by a hostile opposition, Butler implemented not only greater emancipation and suffrage in the Civil Rights Act of 1877 and the 16th Amendment, but also promoted measures such as the nine-hour shift and antitrust laws while continuing "traditional Whig" programs, such as improving public health infrastructure. Shortly before the next election, Butler announced that the Radical Whigs would formalize the Whig tradition within the party of presidents running for single terms only (his critics said alleged financial irregularity had more to do with it, though this had little impact on his popularity).

[11] To little surprise the radical faction of Whigs managed to win easy re-election in 1880. They nominated Maine Senator and former House Speaker James Blaine as well as John Sherman as his running mate, the younger brother of General William Tecumseh Sherman. Most so-called "Liberal Whigs" fled back to either the Democrats or Radical Whigs, who were now simply just Whigs. The Democrats nominated who were soundly defeated again outside of the South. There was also the Left-Wing Geenback candidate of James Weaver, a former General and Iowa congressman, but he failed to win any state other than Iowa. President Blaine was a classic Whig, expanding further black suffrage and increasing tariffs. He kept Federal Troops in the South, which were used to ensure the newly passed Suffrage laws stayed enforced and to dissuade any further attempts at secession. However, Blaine began to lose his image in the eyes of the public as his ties to the infamous railroad industry started to come out in the second half of his term. The party was eager to get away from Blaine as they moved to the 84' election as the Democrats started to make gains among voters again.

[12] The 1884 vote was one of the most contentious and controversial non-contingent Presidential elections in American history. Sherman was quietly confident of victory despite his association with the scandal-prone Blaine, especially after former President Butler neutralized the Greenback Party through negotiating an informal alliance. However, while the Sherman/Weaver ticket won the popular vote, the Electoral College vote was almost tied with a number of states declaring “unresolved” results. This gave rise to the Compromise of 1885, by which the liberal Whig faction merged with the Democratic Party in return for a state-by-state approach to Reconstruction and a withdrawal of Federal Troops only once certain conditions had been met. After a controversial post-election process via an Electoral Commission, Hendrick was declared the winner, with the closest ever margin in the Electoral College of only one vote. Hendrick would die eight months into his term, with his successor's time in the Presidency, much like the rest of his political career, being seen as pragmatic. Indeed, many speculated that English had only been added to the ticket as a means to access his vast fortune. Despite only gradual loosening of Reconstruction systems, English declared the disputes of the Civil War settled, and promised to focus on "sound currency, of honest money", restrictions on Chinese immigration, and a "rigid economy in public expenditure". While some in the Liberal-Democratic Whigs wished English would go further, he was generally popular, and not afraid to contribute his personal wealth to causes he supported.

Index of currently active Collaborative Leader lists -

 
TIMES CHANGE, AND WE CHANGE WITH THEM
Presidents of the United States of America

What if the Whig Party remained a major party in the United States?

1840: William Henry Harrison / John Tyler (Whig)
1840: def. Martin van Buren (Democratic) [1]
1844: Henry Clay / John Davies (Whig)

1844: def. Martin van Buren / Richard Mentor Johnson (Democratic) [2]
1848: James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic)

1848: def. Millard Fillmore / Daniel Webster (Whig) [3]
1852: George Crawford / George Nixon Briggs (Whig)

1852: def. James Buchanan / Jefferson Davis (Democratic) [4]
1856: def. Stephan A. Douglas / Linn Boyd (Democratic), Jefferson Davis / John C. Breckinridge (American) [5]
1860: Stephan A. Douglas
/ Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic)
1860: def. William H. Seward / Abraham Lincoln (Whig), John C. Breckinridge / Joseph Lane (American), John C. Fremont / Cassius Clay (Republican)
1861: Benjamin Fitzpatrick (Democratic) [6]
1864: John C. Breckinridge (American) / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic) ɶ

1864: def. Abraham Lincoln / Cassius Clay (Whig), Benjamin Fitzpatrick / Daniel S. Dickinson (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Alexander H. Stephens (American)
1866: John C. Breckinridge (American)
[7]
1868: Henry Winter Davis (Whig) / August Belmont (Democratic) ɶ

1868: def. Henry Winter Davis / Lyman Trumbull (Whig), Benjamin Harvey Hill / August Belmont (Democratic), John C. Breckinridge / Jefferson Davis (American) [8]
1872: Lyman Trumbull / August Belmont (National Union)

1872: def. James A Bayard Jr. / Benjamin Gratz Brown (Democratic) [9]
1876: Benjamin Butler / Ambrose Burnside (Radical Whig)

1876: def. Lyman Trumbull / Charles Francis Adams Sr. (Liberal Whig), Benjamin Gratz Brown / John Quincy Adams II (True Democrats) [10]
1880: James G. Blaine/John Sherman (Whig)

1880: def. Winfield S. Hancock/Hendrick Bradley Wright (Democratic), James B. Weaver/Barzillai J. Chambers (Greenback) [11]
1884
: Thomas A. Hendrick / William H. English (Liberal-Democratic Whig)
1884: def. John Sherman / James B. Weaver (Radical Whig)
1885: William H. English (Liberal-Democratic Whig) [12]
= died in office
ɶ = contingent election

[1] William Henry Harrison, the first Whig to hold the White House, was one of the most influential presidents of the Nineteenth Century. Although much of the Whig programme was controversial, such as the creation of the Third Bank of the United States, Harrison was an effective administrator capable of holding his party in line. (This was despite disputes with John Tyler, the Vice President, who advocated economic policies synchronous with Democratic positions). Federal patronage strengthened Whig organizations, and the government embarked on an ambitious series of infrastructural projects (such as vital work along the Mississippi). The Whigs also resisted strong calls for war against Mexico, despite a strong lobby within the Democratic Party to push westwards into Texas - although this issue would continue to bubble on throughout the early-1840s. Despite his successes in government Harrison declined a second term, and the Whig Party went into the 1844 election in a strong position.

[2] Tyler had had a difficult relationship with many Whigs, but it was still with some surprise that he lost on the fourth ballot to Clay. (Sitting Massachusetts Governor John Davies clinched the VP spot). In comparison, the Democratic Convention was straightforward with the former partnership of Van Buren and Johnson being reinstated on the first ballot (disappointed, their opponents would manage to enforce a two-thirds majority for subsequent conventions). Despite Tyler forming his own 'manifest-destiny' party, the election was fought on domestic issues and the Whigs won a further term. Clay’s early focus was on further growth of the American System; high tariffs, stable finances, federal investment in internal improvements and a prudent expansion of the frontier. He continued prior efforts in soothing sectional divisions while recognizing the independence of both Haiti and Liberia. While ‘border’ issues continued to be a problem, the party was satisfied with his achievements and he had to make a decision to seek another term or follow in his predecessor’s footsteps and decline re-election.

[3] Henry Clay had been successful his four years in office, and many expected him to seek a second term. However he instead decided to follow Harrison and decline to seek re-election. The 1848 Whig National Convention nominated New York Representative Millard Fillmore with Daniel Webster as his running mate. On the other hand, the 1848 DNC nominated Senator James Buchanan after former President Martin Van Buren failed to win the nomination. Mississippi Congressman Jefferson Davis was nominated by the party to serve as running mate. The election was mainly focused on economic issues as well as the issue of Texas, with Buchanan receiving a boost as former President Andrew Jackson spoke in favour of Texan annexation. Fillmore failed to continue the Harrison/Clay coalition, making several blunders on the topic of slavery, and with his support of a proposed omnibus bill that alienated both northern and southern Whigs. Buchanan managed to finally return the Democrats to the White House after eight years after a narrow popular vote and electoral victory. Buchanan led the United States into the Mexican-American War (1849-1851) in which he was victorious, winning a major concession from the southern nation. Buchanan however alienated many northern Democrats with his staunch push for slavery in Texas post-war. When it had seemed to be a crippling blow to the Whig Party in '48 actually turned to simply be a re-alignment, as the Whigs started to move to being the party of the North.

[4] By the 1850s the Whigs and the Democrats were moving quickly to become the parties of the North and South respectively, and both suffered from factionalism based around states' rights, slavery, further expansion and economic affairs. Although Buchanan had been triumphant in the war against Mexico the resulting turmoil over the expansion of slavery was a political conflagration. Forced to keep Davis as his running mate in 1852 to maintain the loyalty of the South, Buchanan was outflanked by George Crawford - himself an unusual Whig success story in the state of Georgia. However, the election was divided almost cleanly along the Mason-Dixon line. Briggs, serving as Vice President, was a conservative Whig opposed to many Southern practices; the Crawford administration nevertheless sought to sidestep the wider issue of slavery and concentrate upon economic growth. It was not generally successful, and the country continued to struggle over the best course of action.

[5] George Crawford and George Nixon Briggs were the first President/Vice President partnership to be re-elected since 1820, although it was a close run race. Their success was down to two major factors. Firstly, the Compromise of 1855; the one major package of legislation that had focused on the slavery issue and secondly keeping the balance between Free states and Slave states equal with the joint entry of Minnesota and Texas into the Union. They also more controversially saw the 13th Amendment passed which defined citizenship, allowing for non-American born citizens to become citizens (and even be eligible for President) but which also explicitly stated that slaves (born in America or otherwise) were not citizens until they had lawfully gained freedom. While Briggs had been an active supporter of the compromises, Crawford had been less than enthusiastic. The third and main reason for their victory was that while the Whigs kept mostly united, the Democrats suffered vote-splitting from the more vocally pro-expansionist (and pro-slavery) American Party (founded by Tyler a dozen years earlier, largely insignificant until now, sometimes nicknamed the “Know-Alls” for a perceived ability to argue simple solutions to the most complicated of issues). The election had shown the need for unity, but with Crawford continuing to focus on the Whigs economic platform, the question was - for how much longer could they keep compromising?

[6] The 1860 election was hotly contested. Stephan A. Douglas managed to receive the Democratic nomination for the second time as die-hard Buchananists continued to flock to the America party. The Whigs however also suffered a splinter in the party, with the radical abolitionists forming a ticket under the name of the "Republican" or "Grand Old Party" after the Whigs refused to take a solid stance on slavery other than constant compromise. Douglas managed to barely secure an electoral college majority thanks to the split in the Northern vote while Breckinridge swept the south. Douglas' four years in office where cut short when he passed in 1861. Under Fitzpatrick the Union was extremely volatile as abolitionist and pro-slavery militias clashed in the state of Kansas. Douglas on the campaign trail had supported the idea of popular sovereignty, or allowing every individual new state to decide if it would enter the Union as free or slave, with Fitzpatrick un-enthusiastically allowing Kansas to enter as a free state in 1862. Realizing they stood no chance if the Republican party kept splitting the northern vote, the Whigs finally condemned the expansion of slavery into any new state and absorbed the GOP into their ranks in 1863. Things looked dire for Fitzpatrick going into his re-election, as it seemed both the North and South alike were ready to be rid of him. The United States moved into a dark time headed into 1864 with the American Party and many southern states threatening secession should a Whig enter the White House with their new platform...

[7] The 1864 election made the previous one look like a simple warm-up. The first sign was that Fitzpatrick barely got the nomination. He campaigned reluctantly on the grounds that the Democrats were the only party that preserved the Union. However, the division was marked as the election results showed a tri-color map with Whigs in the North, American Party in the South and Democrats a band in the center (plus New York). Even though the Lincoln / Clay ticket won both the popular and the highest vote in the Electoral College, it was not enough to secure a majority, so the country went to a contingent election for the first time since 1824. The outrage spread as the Senate elected Daniel S. Dickinson, while several Democrats defected in the House to vote for John C. Breckinridge. The Whigs claimed a secret 'Fusion Agreement' between the two parties, negotiated by Jefferson Davis, but nothing could be done to change the outcome. While some argued that the Whigs had lost because of their abolitionist platform, most hardened in their support - especially after 1866, when Breckinridge had effectively stopped trying to govern for the entire country.

[8] The 1864 contingent election had been deeply damaging to the country and dramatically intensified the animosity between North and South. However, when the 1868 election also failed to secure a majority for the Whig Party it was clear the tensions would boil over. The radical Whig, Henry Winter Davis, won the North (beginning the long stretch of the 'Solid North') - although with a noticeably smaller margin in the popular vote - but in the following squall Democrats who opposed the long-threatened secession of the South refused to endorse another Breckenridge administration. When Belmont was elected as Vice President the state of Mississippi moved to secede from the United States, supported by the vast majority of the American Party and a smaller number of Democrats. In reality, however, the cause of the South was already lost. Many regard their attempt at secession as several decades too late, as by the 1860s the North was vastly superior in almost every way. The Constitutional Union of American States (CUAS) struggled to get off the ground - it never secured diplomatic recognition from Europe, was riddled with political factionalism and never secured any major military victories due to the ineptitude of the armed forces. However, for four years the 'Southern Insurrection' inflicted grave moral and human tragedies upon the United States - largely due to the sheer bloody-mindedness of the leadership and the guerrilla warfare campaigns raging across Dixie. By the time of the 1870 election Davis was able to point towards victory, but it was clear that the country would be greatly scarred by the peace.

[9] With the collapse of the nascent CUAS, Henry Winter Davis’ popularity was at an all time-high. However, he shocked nearly everyone when he announced that he would follow in the Whig tradition of Harrison and Clay and not stand for reelection. He did enthusiastically support the creation of the National Union Party to reconstruct the country, recommending Benjamin Wade to replace him, but after Wade refused the nomination on account of his advanced years, the nomination went smoothly to Davis' former Whig Vice-Presidential running mate Lyman Trumbull. The Trumbull/Belmont ticket easily swept the country with a number of Southern States boycotting the election and weak opposition from 'Dove Democrats'. The death of Davis the following year at just 55 years led to a rise in “historical counter-factuals” asking “What would have happened if Davis did run again?” due to the possible crisis that could have arisen as some argued that despite the 13th Amendment, Belmont was still constitutionally ineligible to succeed him. (The most popular counter-factual was of course; "What if the South had attempted succession earlier"?) Trumbull pursued a far less radical agenda than Davis, instead focusing on traditional Whig policies like economic programs and creation of the Yellowstone National Park. This led to an unsuccessful impeachment attempt from the Radical Whig faction, in spite of which he still passed the 14th (which outlawed slavery - except as punishment for a crime) and 15th (which partially revoked the 13th Amendment redefining citizenship) Amendments.

[10] Trumbull tried to hold the National Union government together, but the Whig radicals made it clear that they would not support what they saw as "Democrats in Whig clothes." While it seemed like an apparent split in the party, it was actually the Democrats who were most disadvantaged, as since they had recently lost credibility, most of their supporters and representatives flocked to Trumbull's Liberal Whig party, leaving only a shell in the True Democrats to participate in the elections. This created an interesting situation in which father and son ran for vice president by opposing parties. However, at the end of the day, the Radical Whigs claimed victory, garnering a great deal of support from the newly liberated black population. While a former South sympathizer, Butler, a lawyer, businessman and former Governor, said his greatest regret was not being able to fight against the Insurrection (his critics argued that Burnside was chosen as a running mate solely because of the uniform, although Burnside had gained his own fame in some easy victories over the weak CUAS forces). While much of his program was blocked by a hostile opposition, Butler implemented not only greater emancipation and suffrage in the Civil Rights Act of 1877 and the 16th Amendment, but also promoted measures such as the nine-hour shift and antitrust laws while continuing "traditional Whig" programs, such as improving public health infrastructure. Shortly before the next election, Butler announced that the Radical Whigs would formalize the Whig tradition within the party of presidents running for single terms only (his critics said alleged financial irregularity had more to do with it, though this had little impact on his popularity).

[11] To little surprise the radical faction of Whigs managed to win easy re-election in 1880. They nominated Maine Senator and former House Speaker James Blaine as well as John Sherman as his running mate, the younger brother of General William Tecumseh Sherman. Most so-called "Liberal Whigs" fled back to either the Democrats or Radical Whigs, who were now simply just Whigs. The Democrats nominated who were soundly defeated again outside of the South. There was also the Left-Wing Geenback candidate of James Weaver, a former General and Iowa congressman, but he failed to win any state other than Iowa. President Blaine was a classic Whig, expanding further black suffrage and increasing tariffs. He kept Federal Troops in the South, which were used to ensure the newly passed Suffrage laws stayed enforced and to dissuade any further attempts at secession. However, Blaine began to lose his image in the eyes of the public as his ties to the infamous railroad industry started to come out in the second half of his term. The party was eager to get away from Blaine as they moved to the 84' election as the Democrats started to make gains among voters again.

[12] The 1884 vote was one of the most contentious and controversial non-contingent Presidential elections in American history. Sherman was quietly confident of victory despite his association with the scandal-prone Blaine, especially after former President Butler neutralized the Greenback Party through negotiating an informal alliance. However, while the Sherman/Weaver ticket won the popular vote, the Electoral College vote was almost tied with a number of states declaring “unresolved” results. This gave rise to the Compromise of 1885, by which the liberal Whig faction merged with the Democratic Party in return for a state-by-state approach to Reconstruction and a withdrawal of Federal Troops only once certain conditions had been met. After a controversial post-election process via an Electoral Commission, Hendrick was declared the winner, with the closest ever margin in the Electoral College of only one vote. Hendrick would die eight months into his term, with his successor's time in the Presidency, much like the rest of his political career, being seen as pragmatic. Indeed, many speculated that English had only been added to the ticket as a means to access his vast fortune. Despite only gradual loosening of Reconstruction systems, English declared the disputes of the Civil War settled, and promised to focus on "sound currency, of honest money", restrictions on Chinese immigration, and a "rigid economy in public expenditure". While some in the Liberal-Democratic Whigs wished English would go further, he was generally popular, and not afraid to contribute his personal wealth to causes he supported.

Index of currently active Collaborative Leader lists -

1888: William McKinley/Benjamin Harrison (Conservative National Party) [13]
1888 def. Grover Cleveland/Adlai Stevenson (Liberal Democratic-Whig)

[13] While English was a popular president, He had announced he would not stand for a second term, So, the LDWs nominated Grover Cleveland to run as their candidate in 1888, however, Cleveland was an unpopular man who just barely retained his House seat 2 years earlier. Meanwhile the recently formed Conservative National Party nominated Representative William McKinley as their candidate, the campaign was tiresome, Cleveland didn't campaign personally and often sent advisors to do it for him, when Election Day came, McKinley won in a landslide.
 
Top