WI: Jefferson Wins in 1796
- Thread starter Amadeus
- Start date
John Marshall never becomes Chief Justice.
No Alien and Sedition Acts. Possibly no undeclared war with France.
Madison in 1804, and either Monroe or Crawford in 1812. Possibly two terms for JQ Adams.
No Alien and Sedition Acts. Possibly no undeclared war with France.
Madison in 1804, and either Monroe or Crawford in 1812. Possibly two terms for JQ Adams.
Might the Federalists be able to get a President elected at some point?
I feel like whomever took over right after Washington was going to suffer from being the "Rebound Boyfriend".
Being right after the Father of our country they would never be able to live up to their predeccessor.
Every time something bad happens the rest of the country would wish Washington was back.
All of Jefferson's flaws would come to the forefront and his historical star would shine less bright.
Maybe Adams wins in 1800 as one who can restore "Washingtonian" values and government.
Maybe it's Hamilton, and if Burr is his VP well you can see where this is going.
Being right after the Father of our country they would never be able to live up to their predeccessor.
Every time something bad happens the rest of the country would wish Washington was back.
All of Jefferson's flaws would come to the forefront and his historical star would shine less bright.
Maybe Adams wins in 1800 as one who can restore "Washingtonian" values and government.
Maybe it's Hamilton, and if Burr is his VP well you can see where this is going.
Page Smith, "The Election of 1796" in Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., Fred L. Israel and William P. Hansen (eds) History of American Presidential Elections 1789-1968, Volume I 1789-1824 (New York: Chelsea House Publishers 1985), p. 77, has an interesting comment on this:
"The consequences of Jefferson's election are equally conjectural [as those of Pinckney's], of course. If the Virginian had indeed tried to reverse Washington's foreign policy, he would have found himself in a severe contest with the Senate, which was still a Federalist stronghold. In such circumstances he could have acquiesced in a foreign policy that was basically Federalist, in which case the powers of the President in the field of foreign affairs might have been seriously compromised, or conversely, he might have looked to the Republican House for support, thus intensifying the split between the two branches of Congress, which at the time of the Jay Treaty seemed to many observers to threaten the survival of constitutional government.
"The most likely outcome would have been, as Adams conjectured, that Jefferson would, under a smokescreen of mildly pro-French sentiments, have followed a foreign policy not very different from that of his predecessor. It was, after all, the charge of the Republicans not so much that the Federalists were hostile to the French but that they were subservient to the British. The responsibilities of office almost invariably have a moderating effect on those who have to pass from the relative freedom of the opposition to the severe limitations of a practical situation. If Jefferson had followed a substantially Washingtonian path, he would soon have fallen out of favor with the more radical among his supporters. The Federalists, as the opposition party, might have consolidated their strength under the leadership of Hamilton, while Adams, as the defeated candidate, withdrew to Quincy, leaving the moderate group of 'Adams Federalists' leaderless and the party, in consequence, more conservative than ever. It is at least conceivable that the Federalists, under such circumstances, might have returned to power in 1800 with results difficult to calculate."
"The consequences of Jefferson's election are equally conjectural [as those of Pinckney's], of course. If the Virginian had indeed tried to reverse Washington's foreign policy, he would have found himself in a severe contest with the Senate, which was still a Federalist stronghold. In such circumstances he could have acquiesced in a foreign policy that was basically Federalist, in which case the powers of the President in the field of foreign affairs might have been seriously compromised, or conversely, he might have looked to the Republican House for support, thus intensifying the split between the two branches of Congress, which at the time of the Jay Treaty seemed to many observers to threaten the survival of constitutional government.
"The most likely outcome would have been, as Adams conjectured, that Jefferson would, under a smokescreen of mildly pro-French sentiments, have followed a foreign policy not very different from that of his predecessor. It was, after all, the charge of the Republicans not so much that the Federalists were hostile to the French but that they were subservient to the British. The responsibilities of office almost invariably have a moderating effect on those who have to pass from the relative freedom of the opposition to the severe limitations of a practical situation. If Jefferson had followed a substantially Washingtonian path, he would soon have fallen out of favor with the more radical among his supporters. The Federalists, as the opposition party, might have consolidated their strength under the leadership of Hamilton, while Adams, as the defeated candidate, withdrew to Quincy, leaving the moderate group of 'Adams Federalists' leaderless and the party, in consequence, more conservative than ever. It is at least conceivable that the Federalists, under such circumstances, might have returned to power in 1800 with results difficult to calculate."
The Federalists will be galvanized similar to how the Democrat-Republicans were by not having the presidency.
Not immediately. Unfortunately the book is not available online except in snippets in Google Books.
unprincipled peter
Donor
This is such a ridiculously simple concept that many (dare I say most?) people cannot grasp before or after an election.
They'd still have the longer-term disadvantage of having a more limited base of support than the D-R's. Not to mention an extremely divisive leader if Hamilton were to take charge of the party.