|
 Welcome, to Something Awful Decides 1788-2000, the thread where you get to post, discuss, and mock Presidential candidates from across U.S. history. Each week, you will be told about a past election, have the opportunity to vote in it, and debate endlessly over which nominee is the least bad. It should be fun.  CLICK HERE FOR THE CURRENT ELECTION Q: hi, what is this dumb thread about? In this thread, I will be running mock Presidential elections for every election between 1788 and 2000. These elections will take one week, after which time I will announce the results and post the next election in the series. In addition to providing a poll, I will give a brief background on every election and the candidates who served in it. You can use this thread to discuss these facts, encourage others to support your dream candidate, or complain about how every nominee is a literal monster. Depending on how successful this is, I might even post old political cartoons, campaign documents, and audio files. Q: Okay, that sounds weird, but who will be included? To make sure each election has some diversity, I will include every candidate that attained at least .05% of the national vote. I’ll mainly be using Dave Leip’s Atlas of Presidential Elections to determine who meets this criteria. For elections before 1803, you will be able to vote separately for President and Vice President. Q: How will you be conducting the poll? Instead of setting up 54 different threads, I will be using Google Form to collect the results. If you know of a better service/ less abusable system, please let me know. Q: How long will this thread be running? Because I am consumed by self-loathing, I hope to keep this thread active until Election Day. I have already asked one of the moderators here to move the thread to Debate and Discussion if/when Election Erection closes. Q: Hey, I disagree with how you represented a candidate. Can you fix that? To avoid issues, I'll try to keep my background posts as simple as possible and avoid getting bogged down in inconsequential historical details. If you have an issue with how a candidate is presented or notice a mistake, I'll review the issue and decide whether to make a revision. Just keep me updated and be patient. Q: Why are you doing this? What do you hope to accomplish? I like history and want to be entertained. I am also interested in the types of candidates that this board will elect. In its history, an enormous number of people have contended for high office. While some of these individuals have attractive platforms, strong managerial experience, and a network of backers, others have not. In certain elections, picking a candidate might entail sacrifices, either in policy or experience. The Prohibition Party, for example, once campaigned on a platform of civil rights, women’s suffrage, child labor laws, and the national prohibition of alcohol. Other parties might make wild promises, but provide no realistic way of achieving those ends. I hope this project can generate discussion the types of candidates that are nominated and elected. Helpful Resources: Books
Movies and Television
Podcasts
Other
Election Directory 1788-89: John Adams (Federalist) / John Jay (Federalist), Announcement, Results 1792: John Adams (Federalist) / Aaron Burr (Democratic Republican), Announcement, Results 1796: John Adams (Federalist) / John Jay (Federalist), Announcement, Results 1800: John Jay (Federalist) / John Adams (Federalist), Announcement, Results 1804: Thomas Jefferson (Democratic-Republican) / George Clinton (Democratic-Republican), Announcement, Results 1808: Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (Federalist) / Rufus King (Federalist), Announcement, Results 1812: DeWitt Clinton (Democratic-Republican) / Jared Ingersoll (Federalist), Announcement, Results 1816: Rufus King (Federalist) / James Ross (Federalist) Announcement, Results 1820: DeWitt Clinton (Independent) / Daniel D. Tompkins (Democratic-Republican) Announcement, Results 1824: John Quincy Adams (Democratic-Republican) / John C. Calhoun (Democratic-Republican) Annoucement, Results 1828: John Quincy Adams (National Republican) / Richard Rush (National Republican) Announcement, Results 1832: William Wirt (Anti-Masonic) / Amos Ellmaker (Anti-Masonic) Annoucement, Results 1834: Amos Ellmaker (Anti-Masonic) / VACANT 1836: Daniel Webster (Whig) / Francis Granger (Whig) Annoucement. Results 1840: James Gillespie Birney (Liberty) / Thomas Earle (Liberty) Announcement, Results 1844: James Gillespie Birney (Liberty) / Theodore Frelinghuysen (Whig) Annoucement, Results 1848: Martin Van Buren (Free Soil) / Charles Francis Adams, Sr. (Free Soil) Announcement, Results 1852: John P. Hale (Free Soil) / George Washington Julian (Free Soil) Announcement, Results 1856: John C. Frémont (Republican) / William L. Dayton (Republican) Announcement, Results 1860: Abraham Lincoln (Republican) / Hannibal Hamlin (Republican) Announcement, Results 1864: Abraham Lincoln (National Union) / Andrew Johnson (National Union) Announcement, Results 1865: Andrew Johnson (National Union) / VACANT 1868: Ulysses S. Grant (Republican) / Schuyler Colfax (Republican) Annoucement, Results 1872: Ulysses S. Grant (Republican) / Henry Wilson (Republican) Announcement, Results 1875: Ulysses S. Grant (Republican) / VACANT 1876: Peter Cooper (Greenback) / Samuel Fenton Cary (Greenback) Announcement, Results 1880: James Garfield (Republican) / Chester A. Arthur (Republican), Announcement, Announcement 1881: Chester A. Arthur (Republican) / VACANT 1884: Benjamin Franklin Butler (Greenback) / Absolom M. West (Greenback) Announcement, Results 1888: Benjamin Harrison (Republican) / Levi P. Morton (Republican) Announcement, Results 1892: Ongoing QuoProQuid has issued a correction as of 16:24 on Jul 24, 2016 |
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 20:08 |
|
|
ELECTION OF 1788-89 Click here to vote.  Background: The Election of 1789 is the first Presidential election under the newly ratified Constitution. There is minor opposition to this election by Anti-Federalists, who oppose the creation of a stronger federal government. However, their objections have been mitigated by the immense popularity of the election’s frontrunner, George Washington. The states are looking for a charismatic leader who can shepherd this new system and a capable Vice President who can support him. The Candidates:  George Washington
 John Adams
 John Jay
 Robert Harrison
 John Rutledge
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
I'm afraid to vote for anyone but the winners. I'd hate to butterfly effect this thing and end up with the Confederate States of America on the moon or something. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:I'm afraid to vote for anyone but the winners. I'd hate to butterfly effect this thing and end up with the Confederate States of America on the moon or something. But if you don't change the past, who is going to kill baby Hitler?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
So, should we campaign for our picks here to try to sway opinion? Team JohnJohn. I'll let the reader figure out which two I want them to vote for. E: also this is an awesome idea. E2: the only way I can think to avoid voter fraud would be to make people register to vote, maybe have a field for SA username? Don't know how to validate it, though. carticket has issued a correction as of 15:16 on Nov 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
Voter fraud doesn't happen!
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
I think a debate between John Jay and John Adams may be quite interesting. I am not a historian, so I could be wrong, but I believe that this would pit a man that owned slaves but took political action toward emancipation versus a man that made a point to never own a slave but at times dragged his feet on emancipation because the issue was too politically divisive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
Slavery was real bad. I wanna vote for whoever would try to end it. Who has the best case?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
OP, please record my vote as a write-in for Bernie Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
Washington/Rutledge vote all day long. What kind of ridiculous person in TYOOL 1788 opposes slavery? Slaves will be integral into launching our new country as a super power. And 20% of the population of our fledgling country is the negro slave. Washington Rutledge the pro cotton ticket.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
Bloody Queef posted:Washington/Rutledge vote all day long. What kind of ridiculous person in TYOOL 1788 opposes slavery? Slaves will be integral into launching our new country as a super power. And 20% of the population of our fledgling country is the negro slave. We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal... This means slaves, too. At least the manslaves.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Washington/Adams, go along to get along. And if we're allowed to use a historian's perspective, I voted Washington because at that time I don't think there was another man in the country who could have led us at that point. Whether his Presidency is judged good or bad, it was the only one that could have happened. Fritz Coldcockin has issued a correction as of 17:19 on Nov 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Washington/Adams, go along to get along. It will be interesting to see how often we agree with history. Because in this one, I'm having a hard time motivating anything that isn't Washington/Adams. I thought maybe Washington/Jay...
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
alpha_destroy posted:It will be interesting to see how often we agree with history. Because in this one, I'm having a hard time motivating anything that isn't Washington/Adams. I thought maybe Washington/Jay... The country was VERY divided in 1788. Washington was literally the only thing they agreed on--the guy was as close to a King as we ever got post-American Revolution. He had to serve, and he had to serve at least as long as he did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
It’s going to be amusing if John Adams accidentally wins the presidency because he’s the second choice for both Washington and Jay voters Pre‐twelfth‐amendment elections were pretty silly, but at least they fixed the problem eventually. Something that was not done following the 2000 election.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
IMO we should be doing instant runoff rather than first past the post. Also, does Google sheets let you have a live updating graph? That would be cool.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
john jay sounds like a cool dude i voted for him
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
i will forever love anyone who effortposts about historical elections btw
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
adams for god emperor
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
None of them seem to have firm opinions on abortion, gun rights, or Iran. What a weak-rear end slate of candidates.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Are non-americans allowed to participate in this? Because I'd love to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
babypolis posted:john jay sounds like a cool dude i voted for him I'm still on the fence. I'm hoping people can come along with more knowledge than me to help me decide between Jay and Adams Adams is Adams. He wrote the Massachusetts constitution which disallowed slavery in Massachusetts. He also owned no slaves. He also believed in public education, which is important to me. Jay did own slaves. But as governor of New York he started the largest emancipation project prior to the civil war. Then again, Jay entangled government and Christianity more than I am comfortable with. But which founding father didn't? Both are obviously federalists, and I tend to lean against states rights. At the moment, I'm leaning Adams, but I'm open to persuasion. Edit: obviously my other vote is for Washington. alpha_destroy has issued a correction as of 19:20 on Nov 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Would you trust a man with your country, that can't even take care of his teeth? I mean look at him! Look at him. Won't open his mouth. All messed up. Here, look at my teeth. Shiny. Good. I'm smart, I know how to rotate the brush. This man doesn't. His ideas are as rotten as is his mouth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Ibogaine posted:Are non-americans allowed to participate in this? Because I'd love to. Have to show Donald Trump your long form birth certificate
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Mr. Powers posted:IMO we should be doing instant runoff rather than first past the post. Also, does Google sheets let you have a live updating graph? That would be cool. Why would I introduce a sensible voting mechanism into a thread about the United States Presidency? Google Forms does allow for a live updating graph, but I am hesitant to post it for fear of it influencing the results. I like the uncertainty as it forces people to make pragmatic decisions about their vote. Ibogaine posted:Are non-americans allowed to participate in this? Because I'd love to. Of course. Go ahead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
alpha_destroy posted:I'm still on the fence. I'm hoping people can come along with more knowledge than me to help me decide between Jay and Adams Well, according to the OP, Jay was in favor of a strong central government and was ready to encroach state rights, so he might just be your guy after all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Of course. Go ahead. Cool, thanks. In that case I am throwing all my support behind Jay, because I do not only support his stance on slavery due to ethical reasons, but also because IMHO slavery was a major factor that held the American economy back. It was only profitable for a really small class of people who were overrepresented in Washington and in the trade policies of the time. The US could have started to get properly industrialized much earlier, were it not for the free trade with the UK, which hampered manufacturing industries but poured money into the pockets of plantation owners (and hardly anybody else). In other words, if you love the US as much as I do and want to see it prosper, vote Jay/Adams 88!
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Ibogaine posted:Cool, thanks. yeah that idea that american greatness was built on top of slavery has always seem pretty weird to me considering how inefficient slavery is
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
someone who knows about history tell me which of those candidates is the lfest
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
it's john jay isn't it
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:it's john jay isn't it yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
I look foward to forming the Socialist States of America in a few years
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Candidates on the Issues: Slavery George Washington quote:I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery]; but there is only one proper and effectual mode by which it can be accomplished, and that is by Legislative authority; and this, as far as my suffrage [vote and support] will go, shall never be wanting [lacking]... John Adams quote:"Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States ... I have, throughout my whole life, held the practice of slavery in ... abhorrence.". John Jay quote:"It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honour of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused." John Rutledge quote:If the Convention thinks that N. C. S. C. & Georgia will ever agree to the plan, unless their right to import slaves be untouched, the expectation is vain. The people of those States will never be such fools as to give up so important an interest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Why would I introduce a sensible voting mechanism into a thread about the United States Presidency? I don't have a counterargument.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
this is an excellent thread idea and I can't wait for 1860! And I'll be voting for every Adams I can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
I'm banking on Adams.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
wtf is this bullshit
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Broenheim posted:wtf is this bullshit I have a hard time believing that John Jay is so Brazen in his undermine the sovereignty of our great state as well, friend. We just fought a long war against the crown, and the last thing that we want is to bow to another "King", or indeed, if he has his way, the SAME king. Now is no longer the time for this extremist nonsense. We are a young nation, and we should do this right. Octatonic has issued a correction as of 22:05 on Nov 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Octatonic posted:I have a hard time believing that John Jay is so Brazen in his undermine the sovereignty of our great state as well, friend. We just fought a long war against the crown, and the last thing that we want is to bow to another "King", or indeed, if he has his way, the SAME king. Now is no longer the time for this extremist nonsense. We are a young nation, and we should do this right. We've just put in place a constitution that recognizes the average man is simple, which is why we don't directly elect a president. John Jay is ahead of his time and recognizes that the average state, too, is simple and cannot be trusted with much power. We must centralize authority to facilitate uniform law across this great nation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 20:08 |
|
|
Octatonic posted:I have a hard time believing that John Jay is so Brazen in his undermine the sovereignty of our great state as well, friend. We just fought a long war against the crown, and the last thing that we want is to bow to another "King", or indeed, if he has his way, the SAME king. Now is no longer the time for this extremist nonsense. We are a young nation, and we should do this right. I think you are deliberately ignoring the Federalist Papers issues 2-6, in which he argues in favor of a strong Union to protect the sovereignity of this young great nation. And not merely does he understand the dangers of his age, but he also has the coolness of mind to secure the future of the nation by approaching past enemies in order to create security, stability and liberty. No, no, there just is no better path for the nation to take but the one illuminated by John Jay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2015 22:18
|
|