WI Andrew Jackson wins the 1824 election?

WI Henry Clay makes his proposition to Secretary of State to Andrew Jackson instead of John Quincy Adams. What are the effects? Does the Nullification Crisis still happen? If so does Jackson prepare to use the Force Bill? Does his wife Rachael die in 1828? Do he and John Calhoun have their split? How does this effect the road to the Civil War? The Mexican-American War? Indian Policy? What about Jackson's monetary policies which caused the Panic of 1837? What the National Bank?
 
Clay hated Jackson. He thought him a petty military tyrant in the making. The question might be how to shift the election a bit probably by avoiding Crawford's entry (or re-entry).

I've always thought an earlier Jackson presidency might be pretty interesting, though, since he won't be as politically organized as he was OTL. Also, he'll provide a foil for Clay and Adams to counter-organize.
 
Clay hated Jackson. He thought him a petty military tyrant in the making. The question might be how to shift the election a bit probably by avoiding Crawford's entry (or re-entry).

I've always thought an earlier Jackson presidency might be pretty interesting, though, since he won't be as politically organized as he was OTL. Also, he'll provide a foil for Clay and Adams to counter-organize.

Jackson would be less vindictive in this TL as he would not have stewed for 4 years about the injustice of the election. He would have Rachel with him as a softening influence. And he would have not built up his personality cult.

I think there a possibility that the Tariff of Abominations could be avoided. Maybe even vetoed?

Jackson's reelection in 1828 will not be as easy as it was in 1832 OTL but I would see it as probable.

I see the Second Bank of America surviving with no Panic of 1837.

By 1829 much of Jackon's hatred of the British had ameliorated. In 1825 he might evince more of the old hostility.

He would definitely favor Indian Removal from day one but his big opportunity did not come until the Treaty of New Erchota in 1835 and in TTL he would no longer be President by then so the Trail of Tears might be avoided. Of course thi raises the question of who is his successor. Is President Calhoun even remotely possible??

I see the Jacksonian faction as neither as well defined nor as strong as OTL. One impact of this could be Crockett wins the House seat in 1834 and does not go to Texas.

Davy Crockett may
 
The movie "Amistad" never gets made, because without John Quincy Adams as an ex-President serving as their attorney, no one really cares about a movie about a slave rebellion aboard a ship (and they might have even lost their case, without ex-President Adams as their lawyer). Other than that, I really have no idea. But I do regard Jackson as one of America's greatest Presidents. Hell, one of the greatest Americans, period.
 
Clay hated Jackson. He thought him a petty military tyrant in the making. The question might be how to shift the election a bit probably by avoiding Crawford's entry (or re-entry).

I've always thought an earlier Jackson presidency might be pretty interesting, though, since he won't be as politically organized as he was OTL. Also, he'll provide a foil for Clay and Adams to counter-organize.

After four years of relatively unorganized (and frequently corrupt) government, the anti-Jacksonians (or Republicans as they came to be known- I happen to like the name, and it would point out some of the key political differences between the anti and pro Jackson forces) have organized themselves. They decide to support John Quincy Adams, with Henry Clay as his running mate. The '28 race is close, but Jackson's bad government allows the Republicans to win.

Andrew Jackson will be remembered as a mediocre president, whose worth was largely in helping to provide the rallying point for the anti-Jackson forces to create the Republican Party and its "American Program". The next 12 years (2 terms of J.Q. Adams, 1 for Clay- poor Clay, but maybe he comes back to win in '44) are spent improving the country.
 
Andrew Jackson will be remembered as a mediocre president, whose worth was largely in helping to provide the rallying point for the anti-Jackson forces to create the Republican Party and its "American Program". The next 12 years (2 terms of J.Q. Adams, 1 for Clay- poor Clay, but maybe he comes back to win in '44) are spent improving the country.

Under this TL, not only do we get no Age of Jackson, we also get no James K. Polk Presidency. I predict a milquetoast America goes on to lose Louisiana and Mississippi to Spain in the Spanish-American War. Pancho Villa later burns Omaha.
 
After four years of relatively unorganized (and frequently corrupt) government, the anti-Jacksonians (or Republicans as they came to be known- I happen to like the name, and it would point out some of the key political differences between the anti and pro Jackson forces) have organized themselves. They decide to support John Quincy Adams, with Henry Clay as his running mate. The '28 race is close, but Jackson's bad government allows the Republicans to win.

Andrew Jackson will be remembered as a mediocre president, whose worth was largely in helping to provide the rallying point for the anti-Jackson forces to create the Republican Party and its "American Program". The next 12 years (2 terms of J.Q. Adams, 1 for Clay- poor Clay, but maybe he comes back to win in '44) are spent improving the country.

Well, I'd certainly have voted for such a party. (And I agree on the name, for what it's worth).

However, this "American Program" would not be without its detractors. For one, it would rely on support of the Bank, which was hated in the West and in parts of the rural East. If backwoods populism doesn't get expressed in Jacksoniansim it won't go away. And while the Bank was good in the sense of providing central controls, it did encourage an awful lot of nepotism and could cause potential corruption.

Furthermore, what happens to Texas? Sam Houston may not end up in Texas if can avoid political humiliation in the 1830s. If Jackson is out of power, then he well may because Houston is Jackson's best hope for a political successor. And Houston is essentially an Indian-liking Jackson. Texas is still going to revolt in 1835, unless something keeps Santa Anna from revoking the Constitution of 1824. Without Houston, though, the Texans may be defeated. If Texas doesn't win its independence, then the trajectory of Western expansion and thus of the slavery debate will be significantly altered.

If Nat Turner's Rebellion can be avoided, then Virginia may pursue some form of gradual manumission in the 1830s, particularly if John Floyd doesn't have competition from Jacksonian Democrats.

There's really a ton of stuff that can be changed.
 
And without Texas, we still have westward expansion, but it will more towards Oregon, meaning we might actually come to blows with the British over it.

And all the new territory will be conveniently above the line of the Missouri Compromise, there will be no need for the Wilmot Proviso or anything else in that area. A problem I see arising is the Southern demand for a southern transcontinental route. Which may cause us to go to war with Mexico anyway or it may cause tensions between the South and the North to arise even earlier.
 
Maybe someone simply steps up to the plate to replace Houston and things remain on an OTL track in Texas - Lamar perhaps being a suggestion

Texas could end up going down the independence route in a TL without Tyler and Polk, with Mexico agreeing to the British plan

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Maybe someone simply steps up to the plate to replace Houston and things remain on an OTL track in Texas - Lamar perhaps being a suggestion

Possible. Lamar however is too young to be offered the Command of the regular army. Houston's primary contribution their was to refuse to engage Santa Anna until the time and place were right, a legacy of his military experience, which was oh so lacking in the Texas Revolution. The Army of Volunteers under Stephen F. Austin (who made a horrible commander) was so rowdy and so drunk that they often forced Austin to attack (granted they did manage to take San Antonio that way).

Probably Edward Burleson is a good candidate for C-in-C. He was Houston's VP, but the two didn't get along at all. He may not be able to parlay that position into the Presidency of the Republic, so it may fall by default to Stephen Austin, whose death may prove problematic.

Significantly, though, if you tinker too much with the Texas Revolution you're liable to get a very different outcome. Capturing Santa Anna after the Battle of San Jacinto was a lark, but it also allowed the Mexican government to refuse to recognize the Treaty of Velasco. If the war lasts a bit longer, the peace could be the better for it.
 
Top