President Benjamin Franklin

The History Keeper · Mar 8, 2009

In what world could Ben Franklin have been president? Wouldn't the American Revolution have to take place much sooner, or what?

Lord Grattan · Mar 8, 2009

The Albany Plan is adopted, then later on, from 1767-1769, Franklin serves as President of the Congress of North American Colonies.

hzn5pk · Mar 9, 2009

What if the Constitution is ratified during the ARW or within 2 years of the victory at Yorktown while G. W. is still the top military leader.

I cannot see him running for more than one term

What may be interesting is what his VP and cabinet would look like

Matthais Corvinus · Mar 10, 2009

I support the Albany Plan idea- if some kind of new political settlement between the Parliament and the American colonies could be reached- whereby the American colonies create a body that has certain powers devolved upon it- then Benjamin Franklin would be the logical choice to lead such a body.

I'm not sure how such a body would work however- I guess the whole idea would be that the American colonies would take on the costs of defending their own borders- agreeing to raise and fund the military forces to man the frontier forts- they would also need the right to deal with the Indian tribes on their own. The Act would mean the American colonists and Parliament formally lay out the Parliament's control of taxation, which would make clear that the colonies were willing to accept Parliament levying tariffs on internal Imperial trade, but were not willing to accept Parliament's right to tax the colonies. So the Parliament would impose tariffs on Imperial goods like tea, which the colonists would accept, while the colonies assumed responsibility for their own military defense and Indian relations and therefore take on the fiscal burdens associated with those areas.

Tim Thomason · Mar 10, 2009

What if, sometime after the Constitution is written in 1787, Washington declares that he wishes to retire (as he often did) and refuses any offer of Presidency (If I shall be appointed, it will be improper to accept. If I shall be elected, I will see it prudent not to reign.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shermanesque_statement or something)?

Maybe, with Hamilton and Madison still insignificant blips, and Adams and Jefferson (pretty divisive figures anyways) overseas at the time, Washington would direct the electors to choose an elder statesman like Franklin, who's still alive, still involved (he signed the Constitution after all), arguably second only to Washington as founding father.

Maybe the electors'll catch on to this idea of an 81-year-old figurehead President. They're kind of against the idea of a "strong leader" anyway, and the President has a bit less to do in these times. Future Congressional leaders may like the idea of getting a bit of a free pass on things. The role of the Cabinet and maybe even the Vice Presidency'll expand during the year before Franklin's untimely death in April 1790.

Matthais Corvinus · Mar 10, 2009

Tim Thomason said:
What if, sometime after the Constitution is written in 1787, Washington declares that he wishes to retire (as he often did) and refuses any offer of Presidency (If I shall be appointed, it will be improper to accept. If I shall be elected, I will see it prudent not to reign. or something)?

Maybe, with Hamilton and Madison still insignificant blips, and Adams and Jefferson (pretty divisive figures anyways) overseas at the time, Washington would direct the electors to choose an elder statesman like Franklin, who's still alive, still involved (he signed the Constitution after all), arguably second only to Washington as founding father.

Maybe the electors'll catch on to this idea of an 81-year-old figurehead President. They're kind of against the idea of a "strong leader" anyway, and the President has a bit less to do in these times. Future Congressional leaders may like the idea of getting a bit of a free pass on things. The role of the Cabinet and maybe even the Vice Presidency'll expand during the year before Franklin's untimely death in April 1790.

If Washington does not intend to be President, and makes that position clear, then the Constitution will probably do a much better job defining the President's role. OTL's rather nebulous language probably owes much to Mr. Washington's presence at the Convention as the guaranteed President of their new Constitutional Republic.

Big Tex · Mar 10, 2009

Tim Thomason said:
What if, sometime after the Constitution is written in 1787, Washington declares that he wishes to retire (as he often did) and refuses any offer of Presidency (If I shall be appointed, it will be improper to accept. If I shall be elected, I will see it prudent not to reign. or something)?

Maybe, with Hamilton and Madison still insignificant blips, and Adams and Jefferson (pretty divisive figures anyways) overseas at the time, Washington would direct the electors to choose an elder statesman like Franklin, who's still alive, still involved (he signed the Constitution after all), arguably second only to Washington as founding father.

Maybe the electors'll catch on to this idea of an 81-year-old figurehead President. They're kind of against the idea of a "strong leader" anyway, and the President has a bit less to do in these times. Future Congressional leaders may like the idea of getting a bit of a free pass on things. The role of the Cabinet and maybe even the Vice Presidency'll expand during the year before Franklin's untimely death in April 1790.

This is an interesting idea, perhaps in this world the president is a weaker role typically given to older governmental figures and acts simply as a figurehead/public face...not unlike the pope. Perhaps the executive becomes sort of a "lifetime achievment award" to celebrate many years of public serive in the much more powerful legislative or judicial branch.

torek · Mar 11, 2009

The fact of the matter is theat Franklin did not want to be president. Alexander Hamilton probably would have made the cut better.

Tim Thomason · Mar 11, 2009

torek said:
The fact of the matter is theat Franklin did not want to be president. Alexander Hamilton probably would have made the cut better.

Really? I didn't think Hamilton would've had the clout, experience, or et cetera to be President in 1789 (1793 maybe...). He'd also be just too young (either 34 or 32 at the time). He might have his mentor Washington's vote, but I'm not sure even Washington could convince the others. Plus, the divisiveness factor that Washington nor Franklin had would kick in.

In lieu of Franklin, top spots for the first spot could've been George Clinton, John Hancock, or maybe even John Jay. I'm probably missing tons of guys, but my knowledge of 1780s politics is limited.