WI: Andrew Jackson shoots Henry Clay and hangs John C. Calhoun

Which do you think would have been easier for Andrew Jackson to do? Shooting Henry Clay or hanging John C. Calhoun? I'd say the latter as South Carolina almost seceded from the Union and if it had, President Jackson would have crushed South Carolina like a bug.
 
Which do you think would have been easier for Andrew Jackson to do? Shooting Henry Clay or hanging John C. Calhoun? I'd say the latter as South Carolina almost seceded from the Union and if it had, President Jackson would have crushed South Carolina like a bug.

Legally? Hanging Calhoun is much easier when there would be crime for which he could be hanged.

Personally: Shooting Clay. It is bit easier shoot person than hang person speciality alone. Calhoun might be bit unwillingful to be hanged.
 
Which do you think would have been easier for Andrew Jackson to do? Shooting Henry Clay or hanging John C. Calhoun? I'd say the latter as South Carolina almost seceded from the Union and if it had, President Jackson would have crushed South Carolina like a bug.

Even if nullification goes to its natural logical conclusion and South Carolina seceded there's no guarantee that Calhoun would be directly responsible for the secession. He might have been the theorist who first brought up nullification and he led led the charge and supported its happening, but at the end of the day it would be the state government of South Carolina that acted. I suspect his reputation would be ruined and he'd be much maligned by everyone and likely be a political pariah... but he wouldn't be very culpable. Debating the constitution with Calhoun would be a dangerous game if anything ever went to trial, and I think he'd be better off as a disgrace than a martyr.

This whole question hinges on Jackson, Calhoun and Clay acting very out of character.
 
Let's get real here, does Jackson have the US Army on his side, and enough generals willing to back him on this matter? These generals are also needed to help expand the pro-Jackson faction into a serious military force to, yes, make Andrew Jackson military dictator of the United States. IMO Jackson is the most likely American dictator, even if it would take a variety of PODs to set the stage for Jackson to assume that power. OTL Jackson dueling Henry Clay (and no doubt winning) and hanging Calhoun wouldn't end well for him...but if Jackson has enough people backing him on the matter, whose gonna stop him? Perhaps a short civil war (as Chile had a few tons), and the Jacksonian faction is on top with Andrew Jackson as dictator of the United States.
 
Let's get real here, does Jackson have the US Army on his side, and enough generals willing to back him on this matter? These generals are also needed to help expand the pro-Jackson faction into a serious military force to, yes, make Andrew Jackson military dictator of the United States. IMO Jackson is the most likely American dictator, even if it would take a variety of PODs to set the stage for Jackson to assume that power. OTL Jackson dueling Henry Clay (and no doubt winning) and hanging Calhoun wouldn't end well for him...but if Jackson has enough people backing him on the matter, whose gonna stop him? Perhaps a short civil war (as Chile had a few tons), and the Jacksonian faction is on top with Andrew Jackson as dictator of the United States.
The US army during this period was around 10,000-20,000,which was all spread out across the US.There's no way in hell he could have successfully beaten won any kind of civil war and become a dictator even if the entire army threw it's lot behind him.
 
The US army during this period was around 10,000-20,000,which was all spread out across the US.There's no way in hell he could have successfully beaten won any kind of civil war and become a dictator even if the entire army threw it's lot behind him.

Jackson's opposition was scattered throughout the country, as was Jackson's. If it had to be that way, Civil War style, as long as Jackson had the majority of the standing army with their experience and education as well as the ability to raise a huge amount of new units, he could win. Jackson mobilised a lot of people to his cause, after all.

Whether they would become soldiers for him to suppress his opposition and whether his more powerful backers would agree a Jackson dictatorship and the obvious civil war over the issue is worth it is a whole different issue.

I use "civil war" not in caps since I believe any civil war over this issue will not be as strong of an "issue" as the Civil War. Either Jacksonians rout the enemy after a few months/a year of fighting, or the opposite, and everyone agrees to a truce, with Jackson as dictator, or Jackson imprisoned and charged with treason amongst other charges of murder, etc.
 
Jackson's opposition was scattered throughout the country, as was Jackson's. If it had to be that way, Civil War style, as long as Jackson had the majority of the standing army with their experience and education as well as the ability to raise a huge amount of new units, he could win. Jackson mobilised a lot of people to his cause, after all.

Whether they would become soldiers for him to suppress his opposition and whether his more powerful backers would agree a Jackson dictatorship and the obvious civil war over the issue is worth it is a whole different issue.

I use "civil war" not in caps since I believe any civil war over this issue will not be as strong of an "issue" as the Civil War. Either Jacksonians rout the enemy after a few months/a year of fighting, or the opposite, and everyone agrees to a truce, with Jackson as dictator, or Jackson imprisoned and charged with treason amongst other charges of murder, etc.
The moment Jackson tries to pull a Louis Napoleon,the army units loyal to him will get swarmed by state militiamen and Jackson will control nothing except DC.The state governors won't stand for this and they control the bulk of the country,not Jackson.There's a reason why the military can't just launch a coup in the US.
 
The moment Jackson tries to pull a Louis Napoleon,the army units loyal to him will get swarmed by state militiamen and Jackson will control nothing except DC.The state governors won't stand for this and they control the bulk of the country,not Jackson.There's a reason why the military can't just launch a coup in the US.

But what if Jackson controls the majority of state governors? What if the state militias are more or less loyal to Jackson? It's a farfetched scenario, but I'm presenting the best result for what is otherwise idiocy on Jackson's part.
 
Top