Did Alexander Hamilton ever consider running for the US Presidency? If not why not? He apparently had all of the credentials needed for the job.
The fact that Hamilton was killed in a duel with Aaron Burr in 1804 kind of put the kibosh on future political aspirations.
Here is a pretty good thumbnail biography of Hamilton.
Heres a quote from the American History Textbook The American Pageant:
Its strange that he’s one of my favorite figures in American history, since I consider myself to be ultraliberal. But thats a topic for a different board.
According to the author of Founding Brothers Joseph J. Ellis, Hamilton definitely had presidential asperations, but had pretty much accepted being a man behind the throne by the time he was killed in the duel with Burr.
(slight hijack) In the book, Ellis reintroduces the theory that Hamilton purposely missed Burr with his shot and Burr was attempting to miss Hamilton with his, but missed his miss and killed Hamilton by accident.
Hamilton didn’t run for president because in his day, nobody ran for president. You just suggested to important people that you would be interested in the job and the Powers That Were would choose you.
In Hamilton’s day, there were no formal political parties remember. The divisions that sprung up after the new government started in 1793 led to them, but they really weren’t formally established until Andrew Jackson’s era.
It was generally believed that nobody but Washington would be the first president. And he accepted a second term when he knew it would be uncontested. Washington just wasn’t the sort of guy who would run for office.
So when Washington retired, the decision was who would replace him? Adams wanted to be president, but so did Jefferson. But neither of them could go out and say, “Hey, vote for me.” They both had to be coy and say they didn’t really want the job.
Hamilton threw his support behind Adams because he was in more agreement with Adams’ policies, especially Adams’ support for a strong Federal government and his opposition to France. And in 1796 Hamilton had more power, so Adams won the presidency. And Jefferson got the vice-presidency because in those days the runnerup got that job.
However, Adams and Hamilton eventually did not see eye to eye over France. Hamilton wanted to go to war against the French and Adams knew that doing so would be a very bad idea. And Adams turned out to be a prickly sort who hated anyone who criticized him. It was a mess.
By the time 1800 rolled around, Adams indicated he wanted to be considered for a second term. And Jefferson wanted to give it another shot. Hamilton couldn’t run. It would be unseemly to turn your back on your president.
And Jefferson won. Aaron Burr got the VP job.
And Hamilton ended up on the $10 bill.
I thought Hamilton was born in England, and was thus ineligible for the presidency. I could be wrong.)
Speaking of things presidential: if tomorrow Alberta somehow joined the US as the 51st state, would that make people born in Alberta before today eligible to be president? (President Michael J. Fox has a nice ring, eh?)
Hamilton was born (out of wedlock) in the West Indes. He was a resident of the US at the adoption of the Constitution. Do we really need to get into this natural born citizen thing again?
He was born on Nevis, which now gets second billing in the country named “St. Kitts-Nevis”. That was ok, though, because the Constitution provided that anyone who was living in the US when the Constitution was adopted could become president.
Alexander Hamilton was ineligible for the presidency for a much simpler reason. He was pretty widely hated by everyone, and you spent enough time with him, you’d know why. Hamilton was a smart man, who knew he was smart, and also knew he was right, about everything, and if you disagreed with him, that just meant that you didn’t know what you were talking about and you were a fool. Hamilton combined a firm sense of moral rectitude with a caustic wit, a sense of inferiority because of his origins, and an unstable temprement, which, combined, alienated everyone. As far as I know, the only person in his professional life he never alienated was George Washington, who basically served as a surrogate father to him.
Despite never being president, Hamilton is one of THE most important figures in American history and his ideas about the formation of the Federal government (although not all were adopted) were visionary.
And if you thought Bill Clinton had a sordid personal life, you ain’t seen nothing until you read about all the affairs Hamilton had.
All of the presidents up to Van Buren were born in a British Colony.
US Constitution, Article II, Section 1,
Clause 5:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
[GD apology]
From what I’ve read, I’d have to conclude he was a greedy, self-centered, aristocratic jackass.
[/GD apology]
November 30, 1782 - A preliminary peace treay with Britain is signed recognizing American independence.
December 5, 1782 - Martin Van Buren is born
Van Buren is the first US president born in an independent United States. The first seven were all born in a British colony.
Not that it makes a difference, but I was under the impression that the United States was an independant nation as of July 4, 1776. (We just had yet to convince the king.)
–Cliffy
A subtle point, but a point well made. I’m about to declare my apartment an independent state, I’ll let you know how I fare.
There were no political parties until well after Washington became president – I believe it was his second term when real factionalism started up, but could easily be wrong on that.
In any case, the first competitive election was that of 1796. The small-government faction (called the Republicans) advocated Thomas Jefferson. The strong-central-government faction (called the Federalists) were led by Hamilton and Adams, and decided that Adams would have a broader appeal due to the virulent dislike of Hamilton among many leaders and voters. In addition, as Washington’s VP, Adams had a sort of “in” for the nomination.
Since Adams won, he was the obvious Federalist candidate in 1800. And Hamilton was ineligible to run in 1804 and thereafter due to death.
I don’t think you’ve got your facts straight, BobT. Although Washington did run unopposed, there was still an election. Furthermore, there were most definitely formal political parties at the time. In fact, Hamilton ran the Federalist party, which fought to get the Constitution adopted, and then, maintained its status as a party until around the War of 1812, at which time it basically faded out. Jefferson led the other party, the Democrat-Republicans.
Had it been up to “the powers that were” Hamilton probably could have become president, since his policies were so in favor of such people. However, he didn’t have the popular appeal necessary to become president.
Adams was a Federalist. The election of 1796 was a very intense one. There were no pretenses of not wanting to be president. Jefferson became vice president as the runner up. Hamilton, did however, hate Adams.
I know there was an election, but I meant that you didn’t go out and actively campaign or run for office as we think about it today. It just wasn’t done. Washington didn’t go out and shake hands and make nice with important people. The electors (who were chosen in a whole bunch of ways in those days) were expected to all vote for Washington.
It was Hamilton who was able to manipulate the electors to get Adams as the VP in 1789 and 1793 (I did screw up the first year).
The 1796 race was contested, but neither Adams nor Jefferson did any campaigning as we would think it. They just let their people “get out the vote” as it were. But there was no popular vote.
And while there were divisions between groups like the Federalists and the Republicans they were not parties which did things like today’s parties do, such as organize to elect local candidates and such. They weren’t fundraising arms. They were groups of people who were like minded. And Jefferson’s Republicans were much organized than the Federalists.
When Jefferson took a trip to New York before the 1796 election, he claimed he was going there on a butterfly collecting expedition because he couldn’t say he was going there to rally support for his presidency. That just would have been too tacky for the times.
I think both of us have the facts right, we are just interpreting them differently. Which is pretty standard in history.
As I recall, my history books and profs made a big point that the “Federalists” who fought to get the Constitution adopted are to be thought of as distinct, though keeping some continuity, from Hmailton’s “Federalist” faction/party that later developed in opposition to Jefferson’s “Republicans.”
As I recall, my history books and profs made a big point that the “Federalists” who fought to get the Constitution adopted are to be thought of as distinct, though keeping some continuity, from Hamilton’s “Federalist” faction/party that later developed in opposition to Jefferson’s “Republicans.”