How Many Terms Could Ulysses S. Grant Get? -- PLEASE IGNORE; CORRECTED VERSION ABOVE

How many terms could Ulysses S. Grant get?

  • Total voters
    33
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
Ulysses S. Grant very nearly did run again in 1876 -- and, as we know, he DID run again in 1880; both would've been third terms. (Had Vice President Henry Wilson not died, he almost certainly would have run in '76.)

But how many times could he have run, and how many times could he have won? And how, and why? All these questions -- including the poll answers -- I'd like you to ask them. :)
 
jpj1421

jpj1421

I actually think that depends on whether he is the incumbent or not. The longer he's out of office, the less likely those later dates will fall into line. Assuming the Republicans never try to unseat him, I think he could win five terms; from 1869 until his death in 1885. Inertia is rather powerful and given how those elections turned out IOTL, Grant could easily hang on as long as he chooses. Even if he's not the incumbent, he could win 1880 but wouldn't win in 1884. I'd discount 1888 out of hand because he was dead OTL. Given this specific poll, I guess I'll go with three terms because I think those three dates are winnable.
 
jpj1421

jpj1421

Grouchio said:
Wouldn't the Teapot Dome scandal and all other ones discredit Grant enough to lose a third term bid?
Click to expand...

That's Harding, but I do think your point is correct. I think Grant would have done better than Hayes in 1876, picking up maybe California and the election but still losing the popular vote. Ultimately this would be a bit more stable situation than OTL, because there would be no need for that Congressional Commission. I suppose this means that Reconstruction would continue, though I imagine Democrats would refuse to fund it.
 
Sabot Cat

Sabot Cat

Banned
jpj1421 said:
That's Harding, but I do think your point is correct. I think Grant would have done better than Hayes in 1876, picking up maybe California and the election but still losing the popular vote. Ultimately this would be a bit more stable situation than OTL, because there would be no need for that Congressional Commission. I suppose this means that Reconstruction would continue, though I imagine Democrats would refuse to fund it.
Click to expand...

Grant winning, or even doing better than Hayes, is incredibly implausible.
 
jpj1421

jpj1421

Sabot Cat said:
Grant winning, or even doing better than Hayes, is incredibly implausible.
Click to expand...

My first instinct would be to agree with this, but, and this may me having absorbed this site's giving the man a pass, I don't know about that. Grant seems the type, not unlike Reagan, where even as all sorts of things stick to his administration he can avoid any personal repudiation by the public at large. Grant himself must have felt he couldn't do better after the scandals, or else he wouldn't have removed himself from consideration. I'm just not so sure.

Stolengood said:
You besmirch Grant's good name, madame! :eek:

Really, people don't think he could've (or would've) run in 1884? Interesting...
Click to expand...

Oh, he might have, I just think he would have lost. If Blaine couldn't unite the party and win the election, I don't think Grant could have. He's not as able a politician.
 
Sabot Cat

Sabot Cat

Banned
Stolengood said:
You besmirch Grant's good name, madame! :eek:
Click to expand...

He should be remembered kindly, but an electorate that would still be suffering as a direct result of his fiscal policies would not be inclined to support him.

jpj1421 said:
My first instinct would be to agree with this, but, and this may me having absorbed this site's giving the man a pass, I don't know about that. Grant seems the type, not unlike Reagan, where even as all sorts of things stick to his administration he can avoid any personal repudiation by the public at large. Grant himself must have felt he couldn't do better after the scandals, or else he wouldn't have removed himself from consideration. I'm just not so sure.
Click to expand...

Reagan was able to avoid personal repudiation by the public at large because the economic fiasco he unleashed was swiftly quashed before the '84 election, while the Long Depression dragged on until 1879. It's the not the scandals, it's the economy that most people care about.
 
jpj1421

jpj1421

Sabot Cat said:
He should be remembered kindly, but an electorate that would still be suffering as a direct result of his fiscal policies would not be inclined to support him.



Reagan was able to avoid personal repudiation by the public at large because the economic fiasco he unleashed was swiftly quashed before the '84 election, while the Long Depression dragged on until 1879. It's the not the scandals, it's the economy that most people care about.
Click to expand...

Which is why I'm inclined to think he'd ultimately lose the popular vote. I suppose the rub comes down to whether he'd also lose the electoral vote. If he does worse than Hayes did, than he'll probably lose Ohio and that's the election. If he does the same or a little better than that brings California over and wins the thing. I could really go either way on that.
 

AnywhereButOTL

He came remarkably close to taking the nomination in 1880. He'd just come off of a highly publicized world tour with his family, the press lavishing him with attention all the way, and had strong support from the Stalwart faction of the party.

That and he managed to hold together a very stable block of delegates for all thirty-six(!) ballots, when the party grew tired of the deadlock and nominated a compromise candidate in the form of Garfield. Had Blaine blinked earlier or done something to stumble then Grant may well have been nominated and gone on to the general election, where he'd have a pretty decent shot at victory. The party would be deeply divided and he would have a difficult third term, but him winning one isn't out of the realm of possibility.
 

Urcea

What's the POD? If we can give him some better people on the side, some of the scandal could be avoided, so you have more of the war hero, KKK-busting, integrationist (though he would likely begin to tire of the conflict as he did OTL), and less of the man who can't pick his lieutenants very well - with the post-war climate he could be President for as long as he likes so long as character defects or economic crisis don't sink him
 
Stolengood

Stolengood

Banned
...and I just realized I fouled up the numbers. :eek: I forgot 1876!

I'm going to redo this poll. Is that okay with everyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top