Was Bryan the Democrats' best shot in 1896?

[Peanut]

Was Bryan the candidate with which the Democrats performed the strongest out of the other possibilities? He had a very different appeal than Cleveland and the economic situation wasn't ideal. But losing Bryan's suport in the farm States might have given the Democrats a stronger showing elsewhere. Would the Populists have had another run like in 1892?

[morgankingsley]

From my research, yes. The fact that he only lost by 4 percent is pretty impressive given how the democrats were that year. Plus, McKinley only won one state more than him, two of which were very narrow. I think it is also one of the very few elections in which the democrat won more counties than the republicans but still lost (I know it's not the only because I remember 1876)

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

Bryan probably kept it close by basically being nothing like Cleveland despite being the same party. Cleveland was deeply unpopular at the end of his presidency.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I think so.  A more conventional or establishment Democrat would have performed better in the Northeast, but still wouldn't have been able to win majorities outside of the South.