Was 1856 a landslide or close election? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 05, 2024, 08:52:27 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Was 1856 a landslide or close election? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Was 1856 a landslide or close election?  (Read 567 times)
Senator Incitatus
AMB1996
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,517
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

« on: May 15, 2019, 03:49:37 PM »
« edited: May 15, 2019, 04:00:13 PM by 习近平 2020 »

Important context:

If Fillmore gains in those three or four states and denies Buchanan an electoral majority, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives. A contingent election in the House would (if following party lines from the most recent election in 1854) be as follows:

PartyStatesVotes
DemocraticAR, CA, FL, SC, IL, VA, NC, AL, GA, LA, MS11
Opposition (Whig-Rep)MO, VT, ME, IN, OH, PA, MI, NJ, NY, WI10
American (Know-Nothing)MA, DE, NH, CT, RI, KY, MD7
SplitIA, TN, TX3

No party had a majority of the state delegations – however, the American Party began to collapse after the nomination of the Fillmore (who had no anti-immigration credentials and ran on a platform of national unity). I'd say it's possible to imagine a world where the election is thrown to the house and Buchanan does not win, either because New England Americans vote for Frémont or compromise with Democrats to elect Fillmore. (In fact, MA re-elected all but one of their unanimously-American-Party delegation as Republicans in 1856 – so for the purposes of a contingent election, they were Republican Party members and likely would have voted that way.)

Therefore, I consider it a close or contested election. But I would want more context on the exact sentiments of the House (especially w.r.t. war) before being certain of that. The North forcing Frémont in as President would have been even more provocative than electing Lincoln in 1860.
Logged
Senator Incitatus
AMB1996
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,517
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2019, 04:11:51 PM »
« Edited: May 15, 2019, 04:17:29 PM by 习近平 2020 »

Just did some quick research and found that in three of the above American Party states (MA, CT, NH) a majority of the incumbent delegation ran as Republican candidates in 1856.

The lone representative from Delaware (Elisha Cullen) ran again as an AP candidate in 1856. I can't find any record of his party ID after 1856, but his opponent in that election was a Democrat, which indicates he also tended to vote with Republicans.

In Rhode Island, one incumbent (Nathan Durfee) ran as a Republican and the other (Benjamin B. Thurston) was not a candidate for re-nomination, but had previously been a Democrat. His seat was won by a Republican.

All of this is shorthand for the functional fact that Republicans very likely held 13 votes (of a possible 31) in the event of a contingent House election. With split delegations not counted, they'd only have to persuade Cullen or Thurston to vote with them to acheive a majority.

Here is a clearer picture of how the House delegations stood:

PartyStatesVotes
Opposition (Whig-Rep)MO, VT, ME, IN, OH, PA, MI, NJ, NY, WI, MA, CT, NH13
DemocraticAR, CA, FL, SC, IL, VA, NC, AL, GA, LA, MS11
American (Know-Nothing)DE, KY, MD3
SplitIA, RI*, TN, TX4
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 12 queries.