What if Grover Cleveland won re-election in 1888 instead of having to wait four years to serve a second non-consecutive term? Would he end up serving three terms? Or would Republicans be elected in 1892?
WI: Cleveland has two consecutive terms
- Thread starter Intergallactic
- Start date
In terms of his modern reputation, if Cleveland's time in office ranged from 1885-1893 versus 1885-1889 & 1893-1897, he would likely manage to avoid the fallout of the Panic of 1893 and the subsequent backlash his reputation suffered. As for politics at the time, because Cleveland and his fellow Bourbon Democrats were firmly at the head of the Democratic Party, as well as having control of both the presidency and Congress during the time of the Panic of 1893, they were discredited in the eyes of the people and the party, resulting in the rise of the Populist wing of the Democratic Party, including Horace Boies, Ben Tillman, and most notably William Jennings Bryan. Ultimately the winner of this alternate 1892 election would have a major impact not just on the American political scene for decades to come, but also on the power struggle in the Democratic Party. I doubt Cleveland would run for a third term, as there were many capable and recognized Bourbon Democrats to take his place, including House Speaker and Senator John G. Carlisle of Kentucky, Senator Arthur P. Gorman of Maryland, Senator Henry B. Payne of Ohio, Governor David B. Hill of New York, and Secretary of the Navy William C. Whitney of New York. They would undoubtedly triumph over any Populist candidates, as the Bourbons were the ones who had finally managed to break two decades of Republican rule.
The Republicans, meanwhile, would probably struggle to find a candidate to turn to after two fine candidates who likely would have won any presidential elections prior to 1884 (James G. Blaine and Benjamin Harrison) had been defeated by Cleveland. Politicians like John Sherman, William B. Allison, or Levi P. Morton would probably be seen as too much of a symbol of the failed status quo, so they probably would turn to the newer generation of Republican leaders like William McKinley, Thomas B. Reed, or Shelby M. Cullom. Who ever both parties nominate, I imagine the election would be a close run thing, as the 1884 and 1888 elections had been. Perhaps the nascent Populist Party has the ability to act as a spoiler depending on how many votes they take away from who.
In the end, regardless of the who wins the election, it is going to have a major impact on the next few decades of American political history. If Democrats come out on top, and the panic occurs on schedule, then we see something similar to OTL occurring, where the Bourbons are discredited, and the Populists resurgent, and most of the progress the Democratic Party had made in rebuilding its power since the American Civil War lost. If Republicans are victorious, the Bourbons are given an extremely lucky break and are shielded from blame both from the nation and Democratic Party. If the latter occurs, this could likely negate the rise of William Jennings Bryan, and we see a Democrat, potentially John M. Palmer or Arthur P. Gorman, sweep back into the presidency in 1896, and instead of the opening of the 20th century being dominated by Republicans and progressive ideology as IOTL, a more balanced party wise and conservative political system would likely be present for the new century.
The Republicans, meanwhile, would probably struggle to find a candidate to turn to after two fine candidates who likely would have won any presidential elections prior to 1884 (James G. Blaine and Benjamin Harrison) had been defeated by Cleveland. Politicians like John Sherman, William B. Allison, or Levi P. Morton would probably be seen as too much of a symbol of the failed status quo, so they probably would turn to the newer generation of Republican leaders like William McKinley, Thomas B. Reed, or Shelby M. Cullom. Who ever both parties nominate, I imagine the election would be a close run thing, as the 1884 and 1888 elections had been. Perhaps the nascent Populist Party has the ability to act as a spoiler depending on how many votes they take away from who.
In the end, regardless of the who wins the election, it is going to have a major impact on the next few decades of American political history. If Democrats come out on top, and the panic occurs on schedule, then we see something similar to OTL occurring, where the Bourbons are discredited, and the Populists resurgent, and most of the progress the Democratic Party had made in rebuilding its power since the American Civil War lost. If Republicans are victorious, the Bourbons are given an extremely lucky break and are shielded from blame both from the nation and Democratic Party. If the latter occurs, this could likely negate the rise of William Jennings Bryan, and we see a Democrat, potentially John M. Palmer or Arthur P. Gorman, sweep back into the presidency in 1896, and instead of the opening of the 20th century being dominated by Republicans and progressive ideology as IOTL, a more balanced party wise and conservative political system would likely be present for the new century.
Cleveland steps down in 1892, which is likely to be a Republican year. However, the GOP will take the blame for the Panic of 1893 and the Dems are likely to win in 1896.