WI: Washington Declines the Presidency?

Wolfpaw

Banned
Continuing the trend of early-USA threads I've seen popping up...

It's all on the tin. What if, instead of ascending to the presidency, Washington remains firm in his decision to retire to Mount Vernon?

I could see an alternate capital being chosen (perhaps Columbia, PA?) since GW's convenience won't be the deciding factor :rolleyes:. That being said, DC was a perfect compromise spot, so...

Somebody (I'm sorry, I can't recall who :eek:) suggested that Henry Knox might be the first POTUS, which I could see, though I've always thought that an Adams-Pinckney ticket had a good chance of success.

Hamilton's career will be interesting without Washington at the top. Still likely to wind up in the Cabinet.
 
Last edited:
I also like Adams to run for President but also wonder if a Virginian perhaps Jefferson would challenge Adams. How about Pinckney, Jay, Clinton??
 

birdboy2000

Banned
OTL, John Adams got nearly half the votes for vice president. There was no consensus anti-Adams candidate, and the other votes weren't unified off an ideological alternative or anything like that - indeed, five went for other Massachusetts men.

I think he'd be a disaster, but he's probably the most likely option.
 
I think Adams would have been elected and would have been more active than Washington was. Particurly with the Britain vs France conflicts.

I can see Jefferson taking the Vice-Presidency and Hamilton being in the Cabinet but not in a very powerful possition.
 
Could mean a weaker Presidency...


Would there be a Presidency at all?

The Framers were probably much influenced, in setting up the Presidency, by the fact that Washington was going to occupy it. Take him away, and do you perhaps get a three-man executive, with the members elected in rotation the same way Senators are?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Would there be a Presidency at all?

The Framers were probably much influenced, in setting up the Presidency, by the fact that Washington was going to occupy it. Take him away, and do you perhaps get a three-man executive, with the members elected in rotation the same way Senators are?

That would depend on the specific POD. If Washington declines after the Convention is completed, the Framers would still have been operating under the assumption that Washington would be the one occupying the office. On the other hand, if Washington made it clear at the start of the Convention that it would be his last public act, it may will be that the Framers would have gone along with Franklin's suggestion that executive power be held by a committee rather than a single individual.
 
That would depend on the specific POD. If Washington declines after the Convention is completed, the Framers would still have been operating under the assumption that Washington would be the one occupying the office. On the other hand, if Washington made it clear at the start of the Convention that it would be his last public act, it may will be that the Framers would have gone along with Franklin's suggestion that executive power be held by a committee rather than a single individual.

Which is on the way towards a Parliamentary model.
I'll see if I can find the link to the previous thread on alternate US political models.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
I was thinking that Washington declines in mid-late 1788, so OTL's Constitution has been ratified and is now the law of the land.
 
I was thinking that Washington declines in mid-late 1788, so OTL's Constitution has been ratified and is now the law of the land.


Sounds rather unlikely. After all, Washington has been presiding over the Convention for more than a year, and is well aware that he is seen as the first chief Executive. If he does not intend to serve, he will surely have indicated this in good time.
 
Top