Thomas Jefferson wins the United States Presidential Election of 1796

What if Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson would have won the most amount of votes in the United States Presidential Election of 1796? John Adams probably receives the second highest amount of votes and receives a third term as Vice President.

Another way this could happen is if George Washington did not run for president in 1788-9 and John Adams became the first President of the United States. Thomas Jefferson wins the second highest amount of votes and serves as Adams' Vice President from 1789-97, allowing him to win in 1796.
 
I would assume better relations with France (so no Quasi-War). France would still be upset over the Jay Treaty but I'm guessing Jefferson's administration would reach some sort of agreement with France to avoid the naval conflict.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Massive butterflies. No political crisis of the late 1790s, no Alien and Sedition Acts, no Federalist overreach.
 
Page Smith, "The Election of 1796" in Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., Fred L. Israel and William P. Hansen (eds) *History of American Presidential Elections 1789-1968, Volume I 1789-1824* (New York: Chelsea House Publishers 1985), p. 77, has an interesting comment on this:

"The consequences of Jefferson's election are equally conjectural [as those of Pinckney's], of course. If the Virginian had indeed tried to reverse Washington's foreign policy, he would have found himself in a severe contest with the Senate, which was still a Federalist stronghold. In such circumstances he could have acquiesced in a foreign policy that was basically Federalist, in which case the powers of the President in the field of foreign affairs might have been seriously compromised, or conversely, he might have looked to the Republican House for support, thus intensifying the split between the two branches of Congress, which at the time of the Jay Treaty seemed to many observers to threaten the survival of constitutional government.

"The most likely outcome would have been, as Adams conjectured, that Jefferson would, under a smokescreen of mildly pro-French sentiments, have followed a foreign policy not very different from that of his predecessor. It was, after all, the charge of the Republicans not so much that the Federalists were hostile to the French but that they were subservient to the British. The responsibilities of office almost invariably have a moderating effect on those who have to pass from the relative freedom of the opposition to the severe limitations of a practical situation. If Jefferson had followed a substantially Washingtonian path, he would soon have fallen out of favor with the more radical among his supporters. The Federalists, as the opposition party, might have consolidated their strength under the leadership of Hamilton, while Adams, as the defeated candidate, withdrew to Quincy, leaving the moderate group of 'Adams Federalists' leaderless and the party, in consequence, more conservative than ever. It is at least conceivable that the Federalists, under such circumstances, might have returned to power in 1800 with results difficult to calculate."
 
If Jefferson sent a delegation to deal with the French assaults on American shipping, they'd be prepared to pay the bribe (Jefferson being familiar with the practice in Europe), pretty much butterflying the XYZ affair away. You'd see a settlement with France that would stave off the Quasi-War. Britain would not be pleased with that result, but I doubt they would punish the Americans The Navy might not be formed as a result, and the size of the army at home in its various components would be reduced. Depending on how hard and successfully Jefferson battled the Treasury and the financial system, you might see unrest in the North. How did Jefferson react to British impressment IOTL? That would be interesting to explore.
 
If Jefferson sent a delegation to deal with the French assaults on American shipping, they'd be prepared to pay the bribe (Jefferson being familiar with the practice in Europe), pretty much butterflying the XYZ affair away.

Being aware that it's a common practice in Europe =/= deluding yourself into thinking you can get away with it as president of the United States when (1) the nation is proud to think of itself (rightly or wrongly) as morally superior to Europe, (2) the Federalists almost won the 1796 election and (3) the Federalists control the US Senate.
 
Being aware that it's a common practice in Europe =/= deluding yourself into thinking you can get away with it as president of the United States when (1) the nation is proud to think of itself (rightly or wrongly) as morally superior to Europe, (2) the Federalists almost won the 1796 election and (3) the Federalists control the US Senate.
I'll quote John C Miller in his The Federalist Era 1789-1801: "While the American envoys were willing to consider paying a bribe to Talleyrand and his colleagues after the treaty had been consummated, they declined to pay before the goods had been delivered." These are good Federalists who were close to accepting Talleyrand's preconditions. If Jefferson sent loyal Republicans with great discretion, they might have gotten away with it and left the American people none the wiser. The only reason anyone found out about it was because the ambassadors had written about it in their correspondence: omitting that information would leave only the French to know what happened.

Now, if that knowledge were to somehow leak, that would be quite the scandal.
 
Top