Who was the worst Whig?

[°Leprechaun]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Worst in terms of being a Whig, or worst in terms of impact on the country?

Probably Fillmore.

[MABA 2020]

Millard Fillmore

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Tyler was worst at being a Whig. He wasn't even a Whig. He was a Democrat in Whig's-clothing.

[ListMan38]

Of the presidents alone, Fillmore without a doubt.

If you include non-presidents though, I'd argue that Henry Clay and his ego never gave the party a leg to stand on, and eventually killed it outright. His failure to organize a coherent ticket in 1836, his spearheading of John Tyler as VP in 1840, his total seizure of the nomination in 1844 (regardless of the sentiment of him at that point), and his general consolidation of power in the party that left it directionless after his death hurt the party more than anything.

In the era between Jackson and the Civil War, when the Democrats' organization was showing cracks, the Whigs could have capitalized. Thanks to Henry Clay, they did not.

[darklordoftech]

Tyler was worst at being a Whig. He wasn't even a Whig. He was a Democrat in Whig's-clothing.

A WINO

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Tyler was worst at being a Whig. He wasn't even a Whig. He was a Democrat in Whig's-clothing.

So much of our perceptions of the Whig Party, are funneled through the lens of Henry Clay and we tend to define the party around him. However, there is something of a danger in this, owing to the fractious nature of the Whigs, their constant lack of unity and the nature of their formation.

Clay was certainly the leading figure among the ex-National Republicans in their ranks, but even then he faced opposition from I guess you could call them "Northeast Conservatives", people like Fillmore and Webster. You also had the radical faction, including many ex-anti Masonic types who frequently thwarted Clay. You also had the nullifiers, the state's rights Whigs and the planter class writ large (especially those in more deep South states along the coasts) who were far less attuned to the "internal improvements" arguments.

You could paradoxically state that Tyler was thus the best Whig, because he exemplified the chaotic nature of the party.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Of the presidents alone, Fillmore without a doubt.

If you include non-presidents though, I'd argue that Henry Clay and his ego never gave the party a leg to stand on, and eventually killed it outright. His failure to organize a coherent ticket in 1836, his spearheading of John Tyler as VP in 1840, his total seizure of the nomination in 1844 (regardless of the sentiment of him at that point), and his general consolidation of power in the party that left it directionless after his death hurt the party more than anything.

In the era between Jackson and the Civil War, when the Democrats' organization was showing cracks, the Whigs could have capitalized. Thanks to Henry Clay, they did not.

I never really got the impression that Clay was ever able to exert dominance over the Whig Party. Holt certainly paints a continued chaotic picture, and paints far more of the blame on Webster than Clay in terms of getting in the way of success, though there is certainly enough blame to go around.

Yes there were cracks in the Democratic Party sure, but the Whigs always had far more cracks relative speaking since their base was defined on a far less unified basis and this meant that that the Democrats were better able to take advantage of the Whig's vulnerabilities than the other way around.