Who are some of the US presidents other than Grover Cleveland who could be elected to a second non-consecutive term? (I am not counting Grant in 1880 or TR in 1912 because these involve questions of a non-consecutive *third* term after two consecutive terms. OTOH, I am counting Fillmore's and Ford's first--and in OTL only--terms, even though they were not a full four years.)
Four of my hypothetical cases are from pre-1900, four from post-1900--so I could have put this in either section.
(1) Martin Van Buren in 1844? If somehow Texas had not become an issue (a big POD, I know) and he were nominated (which is not certain even with Texas as a non-issue), is it really as clear as some think that he would lose to Clay?
Yes, he would undoubtedly do worse than the slaveholder Polk in the South. But he could lose the only two southern states which Polk carried *narrowly*--Louisiana and Georgia--and still win the Electoral College 154-121.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1844 He could even in addition lose Indiana and still win 142-133. The real question is the two big northern states, New York and Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania was basically a Democratic state, and had almost gone for Van Buren even during the hard times of 1840. (Much would depend on whether Van Buren could reassure Pennsylvanians on the tariff, as Polk did with the Kane letter
https://books.google.com/books?id=lFPWCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA120 in OTL.) For New York, maybe memories of the Panic of 1837 and its aftermath would cost him some votes compared to what Polk got--yet it was his home state, and perhaps he could get some voters who voted Liberty or did not vote in OTL rather than vote for a slaveholder.
(2) Millard Fillmore in 1856? Had Fillmore carried LA, TN, and KY, the race would have gone into the House
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1856 but Fillmore's chances there would depend on the Republicans deserting Fremont en masse for him, which I doubt that they would do. True, many of them were ex-Whigs, but they came from the wing of the Whig Party that opposed Fillmore and nominated Scott in 1852. They tended to regard Fillmore as a "doughface" no better than Buchanan on slavery. And many of them were opposed to his nativism (which was of course even more true of the ex-Democrats and Free Soilers among the Republicans).
(3) Franklin Pierce in 1860? Jefferson Davis wanted his old friend to be nominated by the Democrats that year but Pierce would have none of it.
https://books.google.com/books?id=lJo4oi9cvJEC&pg=PA119 If Pierce had been the candidate of the pro-Southern (anti-Douglas) wing of the Democrats, he probably wouldn't have done much better or worse than Breckinridge in OTL. But if the Republicans had nominated someone weaker than Lincoln, it is conceivable the race would go into the House, and if enough Southern supporters of Bell (whether they called themselves Oppositionists, Americans, Constitutional Unionists or whatever) had voted for Pierce rather than risk the election of a "black Republican," Pierce could win in the House.
(4) Benjamin Harrison in 1896? I discussed this at
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...son-second-term-in-1896.443763/#post-17035845 As I note there, "In some ways, Harrison's second term will be similar to the McKinley administration, but here is one important difference: Harrison opposed the acquisition of the Philippines"...
(5) Wiliam Howard Taft in 1916 or 1920? In 1915 Taft thought for a while there was a faint chance the GOP convention would turn to him if Hughes declined to run:
"The talk about Hughes did not entirely end the talk about Taft. Continuing to disparage it, he still did not close and seal the door. The thought persisted that “I could do better a second time.” If the prize came to him without effort on his part or that of his friends, “I would not decline. ... If it does come, it must be because the convention can find no one else.”
"But eight months later, in October, 1915, Taft did not even dream of it longer. "My candidacy is resting in the tomb where it ought to be,” he said and no regret whatever is discernible in his realization of that fact..."
https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.212134/2015.212134.The-Life_djvu.txt
Even if Hughes had declined to run, a 1916 Taft nomination would IMO be out of the question, because the memories of the 1912 GOP split were still too fresh. But what about 1920? Taft had reconciled with TR before the latter's death, so he would have a more united party behind him if nominated. And who knows what a deadlocked convention might do? But it was so clear that he did not want the nomination that he was never seriously considered.
(6) Calvin Coolidge in 1932? (Of course some people would claim this would be a "third term.") "Coolidge remained well-liked in the early years of the Great Depression. During the summer of 1932 there was even talk of a Coolidge nomination for the presidency, but it was nostalgia more than anything else. Coolidge clearly had no intention to run for any office."
https://books.google.com/books?id=X4jmAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA408
(7) Herbert Hoover in 1940? Some isolationists talked of a Hoover-Lindbergh ticket that year: "At the 1940 Republican Convention, Hoover was still well liked enough for talk of a Hoover- Lindbergh ticket."
https://books.google.com/books?id=-t3Hx4ASLKUC&pg=PA181 This would have been political suicide. Hoover to the average voter meant breadlines and Hoovervilles. No wonder the Democrats were still running successfully against him in 1948... (True, John L. Lewis backed Hoover, but he would be even less able to deliver the labor vote to Hoover than he was in OTL to Willkie.)
(8) Gerald Ford in 1980? Possibly, especially if Reagan died or decided not to run. And even with Reagan running, a September-October 1979 Harris poll showed Ford actually leading Reagan 27-26.
https://theharrispoll.com/wp-conten...ND-AS-FORD-EDGES-THE-FORMER-GOVER-1979-10.pdf Most likely, though, Ford's only chance against Reagan would be if the other "moderate" candidates dropped out early to support Ford, something I doubt would happen.
(I don't think there is much chance of GHW Bush running again after his 1992 defeat.)