A relevant article for this thread:
http://www.americanhistoryusa.com/5-most-overrated-presidents-of-american-history/John Q Adams was an outright corporatist who supported a system that kept many of the unlanded lower class disenfranchised. I could care less if he became a strong abolitionist years after he was relevant, I'd like to have the right to vote if I lived back then. No way in hell, even if it upsets the pc white liberal brigade.
William Crawford was an out and out elitist who probably was a massive slaveowner. Lolno.
Henry Clay was kind of a useful idiot. I might've found some sympathy towards internal improvements out west, but would be kind of hostile to the idea of high tariffs due to fears of corporatization. As well, he was an avid supporter of the Second Bank of the US and I don't know near enough about his position on suffrage to make a certain decision for him.
Andrew Jackson was a slavocrat who had genocidal tendencies. However, he supported expanded suffrage and stood against the protective tariff, which at the time was pretty much used to strengthen the power of the corporate elite out east and opposed the Second Bank, which was an institute of corruption (though I would say that an actual state owned back would've been a good thing). He certainly is the politically incorrect pick, but given that I would've likely been an outright Fenian Nationalist whose presence was used as a political strawman by Federalists and later National Republicans for measures like Naturalization Acts and restricting voting rights to landowners only, I'd probably consider him a "lessor evil" out of the four.
Or, if I could somehow swing it, I write in Martin Van Buren or some other New York or northern Jacksonian type Democrat who isn't as pro-slavery or pro-genocide or as crazy as Jackson.
Poll
