1828 U.S. Presidential Election

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Since his inauguration, the presidency of John Quincy Adams has sparked national debate and controversy. On foreign policy he had annually approved increases in the Navy and issued the Adams Doctrine, instructing that European empires stay out of the affairs of the Western Hemisphere. As well, despite slowing the sales of land in the West to the chagrin of settlers, he has annexed Florida as part of his new doctrine, appointing General Winfield Scott to be Governor of the territory. In economic policy, he has approved the first tariff increases since the end of the Jefferson administration and has increased domestic spending for internal improvements.

While several Republicans, especially those in the West and the South and led by William Clark, are criticizing Adams' foreign policy as too little too late. Clark, in his 1820 campaign, criticized the perceived weaknesses of Clinton's diplomacy with Europe, and such charges seem to have carried over to Adams. However, the Van Buren campaign has eschewed such rhetoric and seems to take no official stance on the Adams Doctrine and would likely maintain it. Instead, Van Buren's campaign is based on helping to more greatly expand the West, establishment of an Independent Treasury system, and lowered tariffs.

Three days.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Yo dawg, just a question about precedent vis-a-vis real life and how this dynamic relates to Future President Clay. Everyone here knows that this forum has an almost unhealthy obsession with Henry Clay, and no matter who wins this time he'll probably be President in 1832. Now, seeing as we've got ourselves precedent for retiring after three or two terms, and this forum's previously mentioned propensity for Clay presidencies, I'm gonna go ahead and assume that we're all gonna get together and have him win in '32, '36, and '40, and this is where the conundrum starts to kick in. See, as you are no doubt aware, Clay was the Whig Party nominee in '44, so my question is: is real life more important than term precedents or vice-versa, and if the former, will you have Clay run for a hypothetical fourth term in '44?

The same that will happen as did with Jefferson. Clay, assuming he's elected in 1832, would retire in 1844. However, he may try to make a re-appearance in 1848 if the party needs him.

Cath, I just remembered that you failed to mention the most important part of Adams's foreign policy in your write-up: his approval of an expedition to the North Pole to search for mole-men living inside the earth. Would a President Van Buren approve such a heroic venture? I think not.

Mole men are not a partisan issue. It is in the hearts and minds of every American to set their sights on one day uncovering a group of mole men, and even the Republican thrift would not prevent such an exercise of national destiny.

Four more years! 

P.S: When do we get maps?

Whenever Dallasfan sends them over, I guess.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

What has the composition of Congress been like these last few years?

Upon their creation, the Nationals commanded a majority under Henry Clay. Before that, Henry Clay had been Speaker thanks to a coalition made up largely of Republicans, but with support of some moderate Federalists and Western Fusion representatives as well. In 1826, their numbers took a blow, but the Nationals nevertheless retain a majority.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I outsourced production of them due to my increasing workload. He's apparently in the midst if tinkering with 1824 right now.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

In a surprise for several Republicans, Van Buren suffered a crushing landslide at the hands of the popular President Adams. John Quincy's bristly demeanor and lack of thrill for compromise hadn't impeded an easy victory over the Republicans, whom many felt no longer represented the interests of the nation. Instead, the economically modernizing America voted resoundingly in favor of tariffs and internal improvements, coupled with a strong foreign policy.