Handicapped American elections series: 1796

[tpfkaw]

I've noticed that there have been a lot of interactive timelines sprouting up in this board where users vote in hypothetical presidential elections.  I've also noticed that they are rather predictable and unrealistic affairs, given the demographics of the forum.  So, candidates who appeal to forum biases, right or wrong, will have their vote totals adjusted downwards, in the hopes that we end up having more competitive elections.  In addition, since I'm a stickler for this sort of thing, nobody who wasn't alive at the time of my point of divergence (1796) will exist in this timeline, although I may become lazy and produce obvious fictional counterparts at times.  Also, various changes such as the 12th or 22nd amendments may or may not take place depending on whether events here mirror real life.

Vote totals will be adjusted as follows.  None of these apply in this first election.

N*1/4: Anti-slavery political parties/independents
N*1/3: Left-wing (defined as to the left of the mainstream left-wing party) third parties (were not among top two by adjusted vote total in previous election)/non-incumbent independents
N*1/1.5: Non-left-wing third parties/non-incumbent independents
N*1/1.5: Mainstream left-wing parties

[tpfkaw]

Certainly not a landowner, or probably even an American at this point (my family came over in the 1830s), but with hindsight, would have voted Federalist because their economic strategy was, in the long run, far more beneficial to the United States. Without hindsight, and being in the same position that I'm in today, I probably would have voted for the Republicans, because I probably wouldn't have liked the new Constitution being antidemocratic/serving as a tool to lower my immediate standard of living.

Vote based on what your citizenship status is today.

Define "landed".

You own land (any amount, even a house), or your immediate family does.

[tpfkaw]

Alright, I'm confused.  Why are the first two options basically the same...?

Because you have two votes; if you are ineligible you should choose the first two options.

[tpfkaw]

Certainly not a landowner, or probably even an American at this point (my family came over in the 1830s), but with hindsight, would have voted Federalist because their economic strategy was, in the long run, far more beneficial to the United States. Without hindsight, and being in the same position that I'm in today, I probably would have voted for the Republicans, because I probably wouldn't have liked the new Constitution being antidemocratic/serving as a tool to lower my immediate standard of living.

Vote based on what your citizenship status is today.

Define "landed".

You own land (any amount, even a house), or your immediate family does.

Oh, so I'm eligible? Add one vote each to Washington and Jefferson, then.

You can do that yourself...  (Click "remove vote" then vote again).

[tpfkaw]

Just a disenfranchised poor white woman coming in to say that George Washington wasn't a Federalist. 

He was in 1796.

[tpfkaw]

How do you know if you're eligible?

As a black male you are ineligible.

No, if you're a free citizen you're eligible.  There were no explicit voting restrictions based on race (although several states did not allow free blacks to live within their borders and/or allow them to become citizens).