William Jennings Bryan wins in 1896

OK, so after quite a number of tries, I finally managed to win "The Campaign Trail" as William Jennings Bryan.

I chose Claude Matthews, the governor of Indiana, as VP, and this probably secured me that state more or less. I also chose to do a complete tour of the West Coast, which probably helped a lot in gaining those states as well, gave up on New York from the start (except for one big speech in New York to get the press' attention), repudiated Grover Cleveland wherever possible and focused on the issue of silver while staying as moderate as possible on most other issues. I won almost all of the south and everything west of Iowa and also enjoyed a razor-thin margin in Illinois (something like less than 1%), gaining me that state. Along with immense joy at having finally won the game, this got me thinking - what changes from OTL would a narrow William Jennings Bryan victory in 1896 bring about ?

Lots of possible changes, including but not limited to:
- what happens to Hawaii ?
- what happens to Spain and its colonies ? Might Germany get some and Spain keep some ?
- how does bimetallism work ?
- what about the lower tariffs ?
- will increased labor regulation be brought about ?
- is an early New Deal-esque coalition possible ?
- will Prohibition be enacted sooner ?
- how will race relations develop ?
- what about women's vote ?
- what will happen to the Panama Canal ?

proposed electoral map:
800px-ElectoralCollege1896.jpg

800px-ElectoralCollege1896.jpg
 
Last edited:
I don't have anything to add to the question, I just wanted to say I had never heard of this but after a quick google search for "The Campaign Trail Game" the chances of me getting anything done this Saturday evening are now ruined. :D lol
 
Bryan was pro-war with Spain, but anti-imperialist. He would probably grant the Philippines their independence soon after the war, avoiding that horrible conflict.

To answer the rest though, the make-up of Congress would have to be determined.
 
Lots of possible changes, including but not limited to:
- what happens to Hawaii ?
- what happens to Spain and its colonies ? Might Germany get some and Spain keep some ?
- how does bimetallism work ?
- what about the lower tariffs ?
- will increased labor regulation be brought about ?
- is an early New Deal-esque coalition possible ?
- will Prohibition be enacted sooner ?
- how will race relations develop ?
- what about women's vote ?
- what will happen to the Panama Canal ?

Bryan was an anti-Imperialist, but Hawaii was an independent Republic by 1896. I'm not sure if he'd want to let them in or not. Spain on the other hand he'd likely go to war with. It mid seem weird in hindsight, but Bryan was for the Spanish-American War, seeing Spain as brutal Imperialists and America as a protector of freedom and liberty. If the Maine explosion happens he'd likely immediately press for war, rather than McKinley's wavering on the issue. He'd press for Cuba, and probably the Philippines to be released, and anger Imperialists at home for that.

He'd push for things like Prohibition, Senate reform, and better treatment of labor. He might have to give up the Silver issue as President when the Klondike Gold Rush happens, only a couple of years away. At this time he wasn't a suffragist yet, but might change in office, and as a Democrat he likely isn't going to press for better treatment of blacks. Shortly after 1900 was the low point of race relations, he didn't care much for it himself, Plessy vs. Ferguson was around the election, and many states drew up new constitutions completely crushing the black vote only a few years before.

Labor might be better or worse for black workers, as I remember not too many unions were happy with black workers, or any kind of colored workers. Believing them to take away pay from them and other unionized workers.

As for a coalition. His staunch silver and Prohibition policies is going to alienate the immigrant block, long supportive of the Democrats in the big northern cities. He might gain labor as key allies, crippling the growing Socialist movement, women if he manages the get a Suffrage amendment through, and definitely agrarian workers in the western states.

Finally, as President he might be willing to make Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico as states much earlier than OTL. That in itself would help in the Senate, if not so much in the House.
 
I don't have anything to add to the question, I just wanted to say I had never heard of this but after a quick google search for "The Campaign Trail Game" the chances of me getting anything done this Saturday evening are now ruined. :D lol

Yeah, it's a really fun game.

Bryan was an anti-Imperialist, but Hawaii was an independent Republic by 1896. I'm not sure if he'd want to let them in or not. Spain on the other hand he'd likely go to war with. It mid seem weird in hindsight, but Bryan was for the Spanish-American War, seeing Spain as brutal Imperialists and America as a protector of freedom and liberty. If the Maine explosion happens he'd likely immediately press for war, rather than McKinley's wavering on the issue. He'd press for Cuba, and probably the Philippines to be released, and anger Imperialists at home for that.

He'd push for things like Prohibition, Senate reform, and better treatment of labor. He might have to give up the Silver issue as President when the Klondike Gold Rush happens, only a couple of years away. At this time he wasn't a suffragist yet, but might change in office, and as a Democrat he likely isn't going to press for better treatment of blacks. Shortly after 1900 was the low point of race relations, he didn't care much for it himself, Plessy vs. Ferguson was around the election, and many states drew up new constitutions completely crushing the black vote only a few years before.

Labor might be better or worse for black workers, as I remember not too many unions were happy with black workers, or any kind of colored workers. Believing them to take away pay from them and other unionized workers.

As for a coalition. His staunch silver and Prohibition policies is going to alienate the immigrant block, long supportive of the Democrats in the big northern cities. He might gain labor as key allies, crippling the growing Socialist movement, women if he manages the get a Suffrage amendment through, and definitely agrarian workers in the western states.

Finally, as President he might be willing to make Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico as states much earlier than OTL. That in itself would help in the Senate, if not so much in the House.

Would he really abandon Silver? It's the whole reason he got elected in the first place. He would have ZERO credibility afterwards, and that's usually something that isn't politically acceptable.
 
Would he really abandon Silver? It's the whole reason he got elected in the first place. He would have ZERO credibility afterwards, and that's usually something that isn't politically acceptable.

Tough to say, how he would act in office compared to out of office is a hard thing to analyze. With Gold rushing into the country the Democrats are going to be less pressured to lighten up the money supply with a Bimetallic standard. President Bryan may push for it, but chance are Congress isn't going to go ahead with the idea. Or maybe they will and the economy does over inflate. If he does it before the Klondike Rush (which started in 1896 but got really into gear in 1897) he might save face at the time and deal with the repercussions later. It's all a matter of how fast Congress acts I suppose.
 

katchen

Banned
There are a lot of silver deposits in the Noatak region of Alaska that never got developed ITTL because of the gold standard. Also near Ketchikan. Guess we can forget about Noatak being a national Wilderness Aea and Preserve. A more sustained Alaska metals rush will give impetus to a railroad from Alaska to the Lower 48 which should be well under construction by 1900. And a land rush in Alaska as "cheekakos" discover that yes, in many areas long days do compensate for shorter growing seasons and corn CAN be grown in the Tanana Valey near the Arctic Circle.Can some of our listmembers who live in Alaska tell us just how much potential farmland there is in Alaska if railroads get built to it? Not only the Matanuska and Tanana but maybe in the Kuskowim and around Bristol Bay? What about Ft. Yukon? Or the Lower Yukon? Do people grow vegetables around Nome?
And if the railroads get to Alaska ITTL by 1900that totally changes the picture for the US in the far Eas. An American railroad across Northeastern Siberia looks more feasible even if a combination of ferryboats and laying rails across the ice every winter must be done at the Bering Strait. The US will thus be under a lot more pressure to tilt toward Russia in it's conflict with Japan. And a Bryan Administration will prefer coaling stations in places like the Aleutians to taking over trpoical pacific islands such as Hawaii and Samoa., let alone the Philippines.
 
- what happens to Hawaii ?

It would almost be amusing to see a President Bryan deciding against annexation of Hawaii, and thus the Republic of Hawaii, which existed basically to get the islands annexed, is instead forced to forge on as a sovereign state because there is no alternative.
 
Top