What did WJB need to win the 1896 election ?

[Ariosto]

Claude Matthews could be a good choice, but an even better one could be Ohio Senator Calvin S. Brice. He was sure to lose his seat in his upcoming 1896 re-election Senate bid due to Republican control of the state legislature, so it is not like the Democrats are losing anything by nominating him. He was a solid Bourbonite, and a Midwesterner to boot, so he would do well in balancing the ticket.

Brice had alienated far too many Populist Democrats during his time as Senator for his nomination to be tenable.​

​

John McLean (D-OH) would be a better choice in terms of someone who is from Ohio who could also self-fund the ticket, but this was complicated by his ownership of the Washington Gaslight Company and his seeming promotion of monopolistic practices. Supposedly McLean took his name out of contention on the basis that the Democratic ticket should be a "poor man's ticket", but given how Populists reacted to Sewall's nomination I'm not certain they would have taken McLean's nomination any worse.​

​

Joseph Sibley (D-PA) was also a popular name, but his nomination would have represented as clear a break with the Bourbon Democrats as could be made, Sibley having essentially made his career to that point ragging on the Cleveland Administration.​

​

George F. Williams (D-MA) was initially a Dark Horse in the running, being one of the only Northeastern Delegates who had abandoned their pledge to a Gold Plank and endorsed Bryan for the Presidency. There was some hope among his supporters that naming him to the ticket would enable Bryan to compete in New York and New England, a handful expecting that Massachusetts might be competitive. His support was extremely soft however as seen by his decline from (76) to (16) votes over the first two ballots.​

 

[David T]

Very likely what Bryan needs is a GOP candidate weaker than McKinley (an Easterner like Reed might be especially beatable). https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...president-elect-in-1896.454206/#post-17838940

 

[Ariosto]

Is is likely that the 1896 Republican convention would shoot itself in the foot like that? Could something (like a big scandal) prevent McKinley to access the presidency?

Not really. McKinley had immense support behind him at this stage, and other candidates struggled to even hold their home state delegations together. Levi Morton was seen as the Anti-McKinley, but besides New York his supporters were not able to earn more then a smattering of delegates across the South. Senator Shelby Cullom was meant to hold Illinois but lost at the State Convention, same as Former Senator Charles Manderson and Senator Cushman Davis.​

 

[Strategos' Risk]

I know, but it feels rather incendiary and accusational to call WJB a psychopath

Maybe the poster just really loves gold

 

[Mina-van-Mako]

So:
Bryan-McLean ticket with a likely Bryan-Watson breakaway ticket from the Populists (like what happened with Sewall OTL). The three keys for Bryan are Kentucky, Ohio and Indiana: McLean could get the Democrats a bit of support from Ohio, maybe blunders from McKinley could dampen support in other states that are more likely to swing (like Indiana and Kentucky). He might be a bit less scary to some by deemphasizing his extreme Protestantism.
McLean is most likely going to be the VP, I guess? Even if there's a by-election for VP, Democrats are probably closer to the mainstream and Watson will probably be seen as the extreme that needs to be kept out.
They have the luxury of being able to afford a faithless elector, and might win Oregon and Cali if things turn their ways. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. 225 EVs, 226 with the faithless elector in California. He barely makes it, but does.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

In my TL McKinley loses because he decides not to emphasize the tariff issue and instead focuses on trying to get disaffected Bourbon Democrats to vote for him.