AHC: More Vice-Presidents Fit for the Presidency

Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
The many Vice Presidents of the United States are generally unremembered men, chosen only for whether they balanced their top man ideologically or regionally. There has never been a Vice President picked solely on whether he could govern well as a President should his President die in office -- and, though we have had some great Presidents come out this way, we have also had a plethora of shitty, shitty ones.

My challenge to you is to make there a way for Vice Presidents to be not only men capable of governing the country from the outset of the office, but also be involved in the workings of the government -- rather than being, as "Cactus Jack" Garner put it, "not worth a warm bucket of piss".

Bonus points if you can name better Vice Presidents to OTL Presidents than the ones they got. Get to it! ;)
 
Jonathan

Jonathan

Vice President Harry Truman was elected VP, when everyone knew Franklin D. Roosevelt, was not going to outlast a term, so he was chosen to be fit for Presidency.

A lot of the VP, were just lame ducks, if they were given more political powers, you might see their selection being more scrutinized by the public.

The most resent VP nomination I can think of that affected the campaign was Sarah Palin, when every one was frightened of how long John McCain would live into his term.
 

Darth_Kiryan

Jonathan said:
Vice President Harry Truman was elected VP, when everyone knew Franklin D. Roosevelt, was not going to outlast a term, so he was chosen to be fit for Presidency.
Click to expand...

That is because Wallace was a non-favorite of most Democrats.

Anyway, how does one classify Teddy Roosevelt? I mean, the guy was practically put into the position to shut him up and also keep a leash on him, yet he because ome of the most popular Republican presidents ever,.


Before 1900, maybe having no Jackson-Calhoun split, you could have Calhoun ascend to the Presidency.
For after 1900, Maybe picking Nelson Rockefeller as a VP for Nixon instead of Ford.
 
Last edited:
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
John Fredrick Parker said:
The idea of VP as stepping stone for the Presidency is fairly recent, with no real precedent (aside from the obvious) prior to 1960.
Click to expand...
I'm not just talking about using the office as a stepping-stone to be elected President; I'm talking about preparing for the possibility of the President dying in office from the outset of the Republic.

We saw what happened the first time a VP picked to "balance the ticket" became President; he pissed off his party so much, he was booted from it. The next time it happened, the VP promoted went entirely against the late President's intentions. Then it happened AGAIN 15 years later.

Do you get what I am saying?
 

Zheng He

You need to make the VP office more substantive from the start. The constitutional duties of the office are to break a tie in the Senate and step in if #1 leaves office for whatever reason.

That is it. As somebody else pointed out, this notion of picking somebody who will have a substantive role in an administration and who is fully qualified to step in should #1 leave office is relatively recent.
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
What sort of an event would make people realize that the Vice-Presidency needs more than a man who can "balance the ticket" when one succeeds to the Presidency? Even after Tyler, Fillmore, Johnson, etc., they were still picking VPs on regional or ideological lines, not on how well they might succeed as President.

Would a bunch of Presidents have to die all in a row, or something, VERY early on? :confused:
 

Darth_Kiryan

John Fredrick Parker said:
The idea of VP as stepping stone for the Presidency is fairly recent, with no real precedent (aside from the obvious) prior to 1960.
Click to expand...

Debatable, but most assuredly you are right.

I mean, under the old system it was essentially elect the person whom you wanted as President, people who were Presidential. Washington, Adams and Jefferson were all that. People who were Presidents and Vice-presidents. The Vice-President was elected to this position because he seemed Presidential.

After this you have Burr, who may have seemed Presidential, but that kinda faltered. Without a doubt George Clinton was elected because of sectional Balance for Jefferson and Madison. I guess you could say here is really where that concept became more or less what the vice-presidential office was until, as you said, the 1960s.

I mean, after them you have Tompkins who i know next to nothing about. You look at the Presidents who were Vice-Presidents ascending we have Adams, Jefferson, Van Buren, Tyler, Fillmore, Johnson, Arthur, Roosevelt Coolidge and then Truman. Van buren is the outlier of being Secretary of State beforehand like Jeferson, Madison, Monroe and Quincy Adams.

Hell, really between Calhoun/Vanburen and Truman/Nixon i really do not think you can name many VP's who did anything noteworthy, unless they acceded to the presidency.
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
Darth_Kiryan said:
Hell, really between Calhoun/Vanburen and Truman/Nixon i really do not think you can name many VP's who did anything noteworthy, unless they acceded to the presidency.
Click to expand...
...which is why this is an AHC; I'm challenging you to have memorable and prepared men actually be picked for the Vice Presidency, not simply to fulfill a party requirement. ;)

Would it take a bunch of Presidents dying in office in a row to get the nomination process to change, do you think?
 

Darth_Kiryan

Stolengood said:
...which is why this is an AHC; I'm challenging you to have memorable and prepared men actually be picked for the Vice Presidency, not simply to fulfill a party requirement. ;)

Would it take a bunch of Presidents dying in office in a row to get the nomination process to change, do you think?
Click to expand...

Well, for Monroe, DeWitt clinton could perhaps be better. a big supporter of internal improvements. Also, if you could butterfly his death away, and also his rivalry for the nomination, maybe he could take over after Monroe.

Willie P Mangum or Henry Clay for Harrison is obvious.

IIRC, i think Seward was a possibility for being Taylor's VP. have to read his biography again.

Lincoln came close to being Fremont's....I think everyone's favorite for succeeding Lincoln upon his assassination is Joseph Holt.

Grant really needs someone better than Colfax. :mad::mad:

The possibility of getting James G Blaine as a VP would be interesting.

I am just throwing out random names here from the elections on wikipedia.....its hard to tell unless you are astute in US political history.
 

DTF955Baseballfan

John Adams wanted to mild it into a party leader type of thing, but his temperment wasn't well suited for that.

John jay finished 3rd, so let's have Adams fall ill or something and Jay be Washignton's VP; he then becomes President in 1796 having strengthened the Federalist Party as the parties split.

Now, the biggest problem is here Jefferson as VP, I think the seeds for the 12th Amendment lay here, though the last straw was the tie of 1800. one thought is that Jay and Jefferson get along better; perhaps Adams is even an intermediary, seeing himself as too old to now be President he satisfies himself with matters of State and maybe a Senate position. Or, perhaps jay just wins in 1800, too, which he could. However, that feels like it's just kicking the can down the road.

If we could find a way to avoid having a 12th Amendment, though, it would really help, because then the 2nd place finisher would be Presidential, as someone else noted.

Presuming it does eventually pass, as long as there is a way to keep the Vp as sort of a party leader, then it will have to be at least a more noteworthy person than OTl and a better leader. (I mean, the AHC doesn't imply *all* VPs are great leadership material. We've had Harding, Pierce, and Buchanan as *President*, after all.:))

Perhaps it's Crawford in 1816 and he dies of his stroke; as someone else said, DeWitt Clinton could take over. If Clinton becomes President in 1823, and dies in 1828 on schedule, you would definitely start seeing a pattern develop of needing a good leader as VP.
 

1940LaSalle

A bit surprised here that the name nobody has mentioned so far is Charles Dawes. I will stipulate that Dawes didn't have the most engaging or compromising personality; he and Coolidge had a rift very early when he told Coolidge he wouldn't attend cabinet meetings. Add to that his inaugural polemic delivered to the Senate and...well, you have the raw material of a man who perhaps was too big for a relatively small office like the vice presidency. Certainly Dawes brought the office to something of a low point.

On the other hand, his plan for reparations (co-)won him a Nobel Prize: no mean feat. He also pioneered the Bureau of the Budget and was Comptroller of the Currency. Those suggest a man who might have been a reasonable president in his own right, and quite possibly the most financially astute one.

When all is said and done, absent some personal blunders, Dawes might well have outmaneuvered Hoover in 1928 and perhaps enacted measures to quell unbridled speculation and margin buying on Wall Street...
 

Zheng He

Stolengood said:
...which is why this is an AHC; I'm challenging you to have memorable and prepared men actually be picked for the Vice Presidency, not simply to fulfill a party requirement. ;)

Would it take a bunch of Presidents dying in office in a row to get the nomination process to change, do you think?
Click to expand...

As I said before, to make this AHC work you need an office of the VP that is more constitutionally robust and relevant. Even today, beyond breaking the occasional tie in the Senate, the VP's duties are defined entirely by what POTUS wants him to do. If POTUS wants to keep the VP shut out of major policy deliberations and have him only attend the weddings and funerals of minor world leaders then so be it, that's what the VP does.
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
Zheng He said:
As I said before, to make this AHC work you need an office of the VP that is more constitutionally robust and relevant. Even today, beyond breaking the occasional tie in the Senate, the VP's duties are defined entirely by what POTUS wants him to do. If POTUS wants to keep the VP shut out of major policy deliberations and have him only attend the weddings and funerals of minor world leaders then so be it, that's what the VP does.
Click to expand...
Well, what would convince people to beef up the office of Vice President, then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top