What if Custer was elected President in 1876?

bard32

Banned
There's a theory as to why Custer made his charge at Little Bighorn on June 25, 1876. He was a potential presidential candidate. Who better to break the
Republican monopoly on the presidency since 1868 than a war hero and the
man who'd accepted Lee's flag of truce at Apomattox? A win at Little Bighorn
would have set him up for a run for the presidency. What would a Custer presidency have been like?
 
There's a theory as to why Custer made his charge at Little Bighorn on June 25, 1876. He was a potential presidential candidate. Who better to break the
Republican monopoly on the presidency since 1868 than a war hero and the
man who'd accepted Lee's flag of truce at Apomattox? A win at Little Bighorn
would have set him up for a run for the presidency. What would a Custer presidency have been like?

Lest we get carried away with this, a win at Little Bighorn would involved the USA butchering a large number of Sioux women and Children. The Wars between Indians and the USA were very dirty, underhanded things that provided the inspiration of many of Hitler's ideas.

With a full appreciation of what "a win" at Little Big Horn would mean, I would urge you to reconsider your enthusiasm for this event. US Army soldiers that fought the Indians generally did so in a way that would give the Red Army pause--use of biological weapons, endless deceptive treaties dishonored at a whim, dislocations of peoples to other regions.

You would be putting a hero in an extremely dishonorable, dirty war, as President of the United States. Dare I say that this would not work well.

Oh yes, and this is the wrong forum.
 
Custer would hardly have been the first President who had gained some level of martial glory fighting agains the Indians; Andrew Jackson and William Henry Harrison immediately come to mind, and as I recall both of them rather proudly trumpeted their martial accomplishments against the Native Americans. Jackson was wildly popular for not only ignoring treaties signed with Cherokee Indians, but ignoring the Supreme Court when it condemned his blatant violations of these treaties.

As I recall a lot of scholars think Custer was probably planning a transition to politics, since his post Civil-War actions show a clear interest in trying to build up a reputation and popular acclaim, as well as adding some impressive-looking military victories under his belt. A victory at Little Bighorn would certainly help his hopes for a political career, especially if he does a good job of using the battle to build up his own image in the press.

As President, I suspect Custer would probably be somewhat conservative and largely a bombastic blowhard; he might also end up having some of the same problems as Grant in that he would appoint friends to positions of power and ignore any potential corruption that might occur.
 
What if was Custer was elected President

A rather unlikely scenario. The author presumably thinks he would have lived until after 1900! America may like hero's but that alone won't get votes. It is those characters with political skills. Mcarthur's delusions of granduer were ended in 1952 by a staff officer who had little combat experience Eisenhower. Jackson, Harrison and Zac Taylor evidently had political skills. Winfield Scott failed to get elected and John Glenn like Mcarthur was shafted at the primary stage.

Custer was also stupid. Last in his class at West Point and noted for frontal assualts on heavility fortified positions. He would have been a lot worse than Grant. Custer saw virtue in military glory, Grant disliked war but saw it as a necessary evil. He considered resigning his commission over the Mexican War. Custer was also a racist by the standards of his own time i.e no blacks were allowed in the 7th cavalry unlike the legendary 10th. We would probably have been sympathetic to the KKK. Even if his disregard for orders had paid off at the Little Big Horn and it was felt expedient not to court martial him he would have made poweful enemies. Any Custer presidency would have been short lived
 
Lest we get carried away with this, a win at Little Bighorn would involved the USA butchering a large number of Sioux women and Children. The Wars between Indians and the USA were very dirty, underhanded things that provided the inspiration of many of Hitler's ideas.

With a full appreciation of what "a win" at Little Big Horn would mean, I would urge you to reconsider your enthusiasm for this event. US Army soldiers that fought the Indians generally did so in a way that would give the Red Army pause--use of biological weapons, endless deceptive treaties dishonored at a whim, dislocations of peoples to other regions.

You would be putting a hero in an extremely dishonorable, dirty war, as President of the United States. Dare I say that this would not work well.

Oh yes, and this is the wrong forum.

I think he is merely asking the question about what would happen not saying it would be a good thing.
 
Top