PC & WI: No Corrupt Bargain of 1825 = Curbed Andrew Jackson

[John Fredrick Parker]

So let's say that, following the Election of 1824, the House elects Andrew Jackson President instead of John Quincy Adams. What might be the effects of this? My thoughts: without "being robbed", TTL's Jackson doesn't build up a political movement/party/candidacy that got him elected 1828 OTL, which means he could very well be a one-term president; as to who would win 1828 TTL, I think Henry Clay stands a very good chance, and that he could serve two terms and see a supporter elected in 1836, making the 1830's *Whiggish* instead of *Democratic*.

Does this scenario sound plausible? And if so, what would be the effects?
(Incidentally, this is another topic I haven't discussed here since 2010.)

 

[kernals12]

I don't understand this scenario that keeps him from 2 terms.

 

[Space Oddity]

I don't understand this scenario that keeps him from 2 terms.

Instead of having the Little Magician to support him by building a national party from scratch, Jackson will just be a popular general elected with a thin mandate trying to control a Congress that is rapidly splintering.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

@Space Oddity That does raise the intriguing question if who Van Buren hitches himself to TTL; does he back "nationalist" candidates like Clay or Adams, or does he become a stronger leader of TTL's *Democratic* Party?

 

[Space Oddity]

@Space Oddity That does raise the intriguing question if who Van Buren hitches himself to TTL; does he back "nationalist" candidates like Clay or Adams, or does he become a stronger leader of TTL's *Democratic* Party?

Who knows? Jackson might just pull something off--he is one of the few "Great" Presidents of the 19th century for a reason. (With the understanding that "Great" does not mean "Good", or even "a positive influence on the nation".) That said, I wouldn't count on the Whigs winning out.

 

[PuffyClouds]

Jackson's administration was plagued with corrupt individuals who obtained position due to the spoils system, yes? Sans national outrage of the Corrupt Bargain, he gets tossed out as a bad job. But who takes his place? That man and his platform may not be very charitably disposed. I expect there is room for a strong nativist and antimasonic platform to supplant the Jacksonian hold on Appalachia and the Old Northwest. There was a lot of animosity built up from ratification through the Era of Good Feelings, Jackson was a steam relief valve. If they radical successors have enough sway, expect amendments.

 

[Raferty]

Jackson's level of popular support was enough to win twice if the splits still happened as in OTL. Adams, outside of New England and New York, didn't really have much of another regional base, and he and Clay would simply split the anti-Jacksonian vote. Jackson needed to keep Pennsylvania and to win North Carolina. If he does those two things, he should be fine. I do not see him losing Pennsylvania, and North Carolina needs a stronger Crawford campaign.

The only way Jackson loses in 1828 if he wins in 1824 is if there is a economic panic from the National Bank closure that hits before the election and if Adams or someone else is somehow able to unify the opposition.

His provocative actions taken against the Native Americans and the simultaneous settling of spoilation claims and establishment of more trade with Europe was very popular. If he does what he did OTL on the subject, and at the same time does not crash the economy, he should win reelection.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

What if, in 1828, Henry Clay and JQ Adams actually co-ordinate a campaign instead of competing against each other, to bring down Jackson, creating a sort of earlier anti-Jackson party? Is that even something their respective characters, skills, and political context would allow them to do?

 

[PuffyClouds]

Clay's #1 interest was Henry Clay. He could talk until he was blue in the face about his American System, but if it looked like another person would have got the credit he would have poisoned the well.

 

[Thomas1195]

Clay's #1 interest was Henry Clay. He could talk until he was blue in the face about his American System, but if it looked like another person would have got the credit he would have poisoned the well.

Maybe Adams promises to include Clay's American System into his policies, and gives him a Secretary of the Treasury position.

 

[DanMcCollum]

Clay's #1 interest was Henry Clay. He could talk until he was blue in the face about his American System, but if it looked like another person would have got the credit he would have poisoned the well.

JQA, on the other hand, was a patriot first and was willing to put his ego aside (as much as he might hate it). Adams would be willing to work with Clay if he truly felt it would lead to the defeat of an early Jackson administration (assuming Jackson is as terrible as he probably would end up being).

Adams would probably want another turn as Secretary of State or support in the Senate (as much as he claimed he didn't want it, Webster blocking him from a second turn in the Senate burned Adams pretty bad)

 

[Thomas1195]

JQA, on the other hand, was a patriot first and was willing to put his ego aside (as much as he might hate it). Adams would be willing to work with Clay if he truly felt it would lead to the defeat of an early Jackson administration (assuming Jackson is as terrible as he probably would end up being).

Adams would probably want another turn as Secretary of State or support in the Senate (as much as he claimed he didn't want it, Webster blocking him from a second turn in the Senate burned Adams pretty bad)

But would curbing Jackson affect the expansion of suffrage and democratization in the US?

 

[DanMcCollum]

But would curbing Jackson affect the expansion of suffrage and democratization in the US?

I don't really think so. Most of those reforms were already on the process and, I think, inevitable. Clay - the Man of the West - would still strongly support a greater suffrage as many of the new voters would be potential constituents. Really, the only people against such reforms would be the hardcore Federalists.

 

[Space Oddity]

I don't really think so. Most of those reforms were already on the process and, I think, inevitable. Clay - the Man of the West - would still strongly support a greater suffrage as many of the new voters would be potential constituents. Really, the only people against such reforms would be the hardcore Federalists.

Who more or less no longer existed.

 

[Thomas1195]

I don't really think so. Most of those reforms were already on the process and, I think, inevitable. Clay - the Man of the West - would still strongly support a greater suffrage as many of the new voters would be potential constituents. Really, the only people against such reforms would be the hardcore Federalists.

Would US democracy become more or less flawed without Jacksonian democracy?

 

[Thomas1195]

Who more or less no longer existed.

Daniel Webster

 

[DanMcCollum]

Who more or less no longer existed.

Exactly. They remained a force within Massachusetts (hence Webster being able to deny former President JQA a seat in the Senate) but they were only a faction even there.

 

[DanMcCollum]

So if we go with an Adams-Clay co-ordinated campaign taking down Jackson in 1828, this is what we could have:
Andrew Jackson (1825-28)
John Q Adams (1829-36)
Henry Clay (1837-40)

I'd actually flip Clay and Adams, oddly enough. I think Clay is the better candidate to oppose Jackson (he cuts into Jackson's Western base) and let's face it - as much as I love Clay, Henry Clay was Henry Clay . He'd want the top spot and, really, Adams could be arrogant but he wasn't a fool - he'd support Clay for President if he felt him the most likely candidate to win.

So, you'd see Henry Clay for two terms, with JQA as his Secretary of State (oh, how that works screw with Webster!) with Adams as Clay's natural successor.

 

[PuffyClouds]

JQA, on the other hand, was a patriot first and was willing to put his ego aside (as much as he might hate it). Adams would be willing to work with Clay if he truly felt it would lead to the defeat of an early Jackson administration (assuming Jackson is as terrible as he probably would end up being).

Adams would probably want another turn as Secretary of State or support in the Senate (as much as he claimed he didn't want it, Webster blocking him from a second turn in the Senate burned Adams pretty bad)

JQ Adams became the image of a political creature who meandered his way through the system to the detriment of his good character. Really, I think he and Jackson were natural partners that should have worked together to defeat the menace of people like Clay, Crawford, and most especially Calhoun.

Maybe Adams promises to include Clay's American System into his policies, and gives him a Secretary of the Treasury position.

Henry Clay plays second fiddle to no man. I am heavily biased against him and may not be seeing things clearly, sorry.

 

[Thomas1195]

JQ Adams became the image of a political creature who meandered his way through the system to the detriment of his good character. Really, I think he and Jackson were natural partners

Well, JQA platform was that of the Whig or more accurately, the later Republican, not the Democrats. He agreed with American System, and was an abolitionist. Jackson was the opposite of him.