He actually lost five times, three times in the main contest (1824, 1832, 1844) and twice when he tried to get nominated (1840, 1848). 1828, when he supported Adam's reelection, and 1836, when the fresh Whig Party wasn't ready to nominate a real candidate for the whole nation and had 4 candidates, actually were the only times he didn't run for the presidency.
Jackson: So I won the most electoral votes right? Clay: Yep Jackson: And also the largest number of the population voted for me? Clay: Mmm Hmmm Jackson: Then that democratically makes me President! Clay: Makes sense to me Jackson: So make me President! Clay: Nah
@@12KevinPower Being a republic and being a democracy are not mutually exclusive. The US is both. The definition of a republic is a country with a non-hereditary head of state. The US is a republic and so is China as they do not have a hereditary head of state. The US is a democracy though while China is not.
@@optimusmikey "Federal" means that it's not unitary or confederal. "Constitutional" means that it has a constitution... Which is what all Democracies have. And "republic" is usually used to describe Democratic or "I swear I'm Democratic" countries. None of these contradict Democracy, two of them actually affirm it.
@Harold Brick Lol. You got that right. I'm from Crawford, Georgia and I live right down the road from where he's buried. He's just a boring footnote though for sure lol.
1:03 "he had mismanaged his money." There's more to it than that. The debt came from his time as Governor of New York during the War of 1812 and he spent his own money to equip and pay the troops when the legislature wasn't in session or wouldn't approve the funds. The government partially reimbursed him in 1823 but not enough to get him out of financial trouble. Talk about a true leader
I'm really imagining how Jackson felt when he found out that he lost when he technically won. He might have wanted to duel the entire House after that.
@@alexanderrobins7497 Jackson was against Native Americans whether he won this election or not. John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay just gave the Native Americans more time before Jackson would have the chance to remove them.
Pres. Jackson did, however, possibly say, "My only regrets are that I never shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun." Historians debate whether Pres. Jackson ever said this, though this missive would certainly fit his character.
I can't help but wonder after how many time Clay tried to run for president after this election if the Corrupt Bargain also cursed him from winning future presidential elections. I mean, it's not like Clay wasn't popular as a candidate, but even when he made it to the main election he still ended up losing.
Polk's dark horse win and not winning the nomination against Harrison (once again due to war hero reasons) broke his necks. These were the only elections he had a real chance to win.
I love how the picture of clay shows him smirking like he out maneuvered his opponents in chess, because he did. The only man who could truly out pizza the hut lol.
I wish the 12th amendment was revised so that a runoff election takes place when there is no clear winner based on the electoral votes. Great video Mr. Beat!
The electors don't actually vote until December, so it would be really difficult to squeeze in another national election and corresponding electoral vote before Inauguration Day.
I've been asked by youTube to give some feedback on this video I rated it excellent it's informative in fact very! and I love hearing these classical pieces never heard that Schubert overture before thanks for introducing me to it! (Mind you, last night I couldn't help watching some of the 1960s clips just for fun Chubby Checker is a far cry from Beethoven's violin concerto :-D)
Election (confusing) rundown: Took place from: Oct. 25-Dec. 1 1824/Feb. 9 1825 (contingent) Turnout: 26.9% (up 16.8% from 1820) Members of the collage: 261 Elec. Votes needed to Win: 131 Candidates: Dem.-Rep. side: Incumbent Secretary of State John Quincy Adams from Massachusetts. Running Mate: Incumbent Secretary of War John C. Calhoun from South Carolina. Also Dem.-Rep. Side?: Incumbent Senator Andrew Jackson from Tennessee. Running Mate: Also John C. Calhoun. Also Dem.-Rep. Side: Incumbent Secretary of the Treasury William H. Crawford from Georgia. Running Mate: Incumbent Senator Nathaniel Macon from North Carolina. Incumbent House speaker Henry Clay from Kentucky. Running Mate: Former Senator Nathan Sanford from New York. Elec. Votes: Jackson/Calhoun: 99. Adams/Calhoun: 84. Crawford/Macon: 41. Clay/Sanford: 37. Delegate Count (contingent): Adams: 13. Jackson: 7. Crawford: 4. Popular Vote: Jackson/Calhoun: 151,271/41.4%. Adams/Calhoun: 113,122/30.9%. Clay/Sanford: 47,351/13%. Crawford/Macon: 40,857/11.2%. States Carried: Jackson/Calhoun: 12. Adams/Calhoun: 7. Clay/Sanford: 3. Crawford/Mason: 2. Total Votes: 365,833 Fact for election: First time the popular vote winner didn’t win election and only time electoral vote winner didn’t win election.
So I am listening to an audiobook biography of Henry Clay that really goes into detail about this election, particularly the "less than fully corrupt bargain." And also into how Henry Clay was a lawyer who enjoyed theatrics in the courtroom. Henry Clay biography video one of these days? In the spirit of Franklin Pierce bios, perhaps...
0:49 Fun fact: Daniel Tompkins was the only Vice President from the 19th century to serve two full terms under one president. In fact, only nine Vice Presidents (Adams, Tompkins, Marshall, Garner, Nixon, Bush, Gore, Cheney and Biden) have served two full terms under one president.
This election and the first election that Thomas Jefferson won his presidency and I think we’re the only ones that came down to the house deciding who was president.
After this, 1968 and 2020 have been the only other times the House came close to having to decide: Had AK, DE, MO, NV, and WI opted for Humphrey in '68; and had AZ, GA, and WI opted for "45" in '20...
@Conor1_23 True - in terms of nationwide popular vote ~ (However, many votes came from CA, NY, IL, and NJ - garnering extra votes that did not yield in more _electoral votes_ !)
@@bonghunezhou5051 what I was referring to was yes, the popular vote, but also how Biden got GA & AZ while still winning back the MI, WI & PA states, so having more votes than Clinton EVEN IF she got MI WI & PA
Hmmm... didn't Clay & Adams support the Second National Bank? Pres. Jackson vetoed the re-charter of the Bank, though. Perhaps the candidates weren't too far apart on other issues, but the Bank's existence was a BIG issue!
Here's what should have happened. Andrew Jackson: "Oh Senator Calhoun. Did you hear from that Lincoln boy at all?" John C. Calhoun: "Oh ummmmm... I know nothing of him. I'm gonna leave the cabinet. Bye!"
What’s interesting with this election is that Clay got more votes than Crawford, popular vote wise, but failed to get more electoral votes than him. Had clay gotten 3rd place, he most likely would’ve won this election
It's hard to not feel it's unfair when popular vote winner doesn't win the presidency (and/or when plurality winner doesn't still win) and yet it has happened both long ago and recently and people do complain about it but not enough to actually change the law.
10th election 6th prez.John Quincy Adams, the first “Dark Horse”? I guess not, 12th amendment was his pathway. Jackson was screwed 😆.... “The Corrupt Bargain” John C Calhoun won in a separate election for VP. Strange one party election! Thanks for the post 👍
Actually, I think his life would be very interesting if his personal papers wouldn't all have been destroyed in a fire. That's why almost no biography of him exists (the last one being from the 60s I think and using interesting sources from the papers of friends, contemporaries and opponents, which was enough to paint a fairly full picture of him), while he actually was one of the most important politicians already as a very young man (I think even the youngest senator) during the era when the founders dominated everything. He became prominent when he argued against the abolition of the National Bank under Jefferson. Afterwards, the presidents all (Madison, Monroe, Adams) desperately wanted him in their administrations, Madison wanted him as war secretary for the War of 1812, but he first declined because actually he strongly opposed the war. That's why then becoming Minister to France, trying to work for peace, was the perfect job for him. After the war had ended, he finally accepted Adam's renewed offer as war secretary in 1815 and succeeded famous James Monroe if I remember it right. Then in the 1816 election (with the Federalists now being irrelevant) he, the young cabinet newbie, and Monroe, the huge founding father, became the major rivals for the presidency and the presidential nomination. Even though Mr. Beat said in his video that Crawford had no chance and Monroe would have kicked butt, it is a well-known fact that many Democratic-Republicans disliked or even hated Monroe before he became president, and the official result of the nominating caucus was somewehere like 87 votes for Monroe and 83 for Crawford. This doesn't look like a butt-kick for me, in fact it was the first narrow presidential nomination result in American history (Jefferson and Madison were the founders of the party, so they had almost unanimous support in their caucuses). The congressional caucus was already heavily critisised as an undemocratic, exclusive nominating body back then, but before 1824 its result was accepeted as the official party nomination. Crawford nearly would have been the fifth president! After one year in the war department and out of the presidential race, he was promoted to treasury secretary shortly before the 1816 election for the remainder of Madison's term, which actually set the stage for his largest achievement. Monroe wasn't resentful of their rivalry and his near defeat to Crawford, and to Crawford's own surprise (he already was on the way to return home) Monroe kept him in the treasury during his whole administration. Crawford reorganised the whole treasury department, which had been a mess and the secend largest government department after the state department, and built it into a modern, well-organised department in his more than 8 years. Of course this wasn't anything which made headlines, but according to his biographer the treasury still benefited from that a century later. After 8 years in Monroe's administration and as he had been Monroe's strongest contender 8 years before, he was one of the foremost leaders in the party hierarchy now according to his biographer, maybe even number one (which explains why the last congressional caucus ever nominated him as official party candidate), so it was ony logical that he ran for president again, this time with a whole run, but he was unlucky because 1816, when he narrowly lost against Monroe, had been the last time the people accepted the congressional caucus, while in 1824 it was finally discredited, and regional, more popular candidates had been successfully nominated by state legislatures. (1820 had been a formality as Monroe already was president and almost nobody was present during the caucus.) When Adams (who is famous for selecting his personnel solely for competence and not for political reasons or party) became president, he ALSO wanted to keep Crawford in his administration as the third successive president and tried to persuade him, but this time Crawford, although he had well recovered from his stroke, refused and insisted on going home and ending his career. If he wanted, he could have started his own party, the Crawford Republicans, like Adams's and Clay's National Republicans and Jackson's Jacksonian Democrats, but he wasn't such a strategic politician like Clay and Jackson. His supporters wanted him to run as president or vice president in 1828 and even 1832, but he didn't want. Crawford was one of the most important politicians of his time at an extremely young age (he was 44 in his 1816 run!) and very talented and respected for his argumentation, but he lost on almost every battle or issue he is known for, the continuation of the National Bank, the opposition to the War of 1812, the 1816 party nomination and the 1824 election, leaving him only one lasting legacy, that of a good civil servant in government, which isn't exactly what makes history books go wild.
@@SamWinchester000 That's a lot more interesting than his wiki article lol, I haven't delved into local resources yet, but I know there's a pretty solid collection of materials at the county library What's interesting to me is that he was always in the mix with prominent early American figures and such, but he's an obscure figure that doesn't have that sexy historical story to tell, as you pointed out...but as far as local history goes, quite revealing. As well known as the town named after him in GA
One has to note that nowadays current historians do not believe that the famous "corrupt bargain" ever existed. It was a rumour spread by Jackson's side long before Adams selected his secretaries and designed to preemptively destroy him and especially Clay. Adams is notoriously famous for his extremely correct and clean, unpolitical government service, which makes such a deal unrealistic. Clay was in a terrible dilemma when he was offered the office for his qualification because he actually wanted it but he knew that after this rumoured stories nobody would believe him that it wasn't the price of a deal, which would have to ultimately force him to refuse the office Adams would have given him anyway. He decided to accept the office and stand the accusations. The claim of the corrupt bargain dominated the public eye for the next four years, let the Jacksonians notoriously only work completely destructively and pretty much do nothing useful in congress for four years, only passing senseless propaganda designed to accuse the government and win the next election, which is why Adams is one of the least successful presidents ever. All that helped godfather Jackson to clearly win the next election, after sabotaging his predecessor for the whole term. To be honest, it's absurd how Jackson denounced one of the cleanest government officials America ever hade, while abusing the system himself and only filling it with propaganda for four years.The saddest thing is that these invented accusations were percieved as safe information and persisted for almost 200 years.
Henry Clay does realize Washington was a war hero from the American Revolution, Right? Added that and his time in the French and Indiana he killed many enemy soldiers for the cause of the war he fought in, even if the British refuse to acknowledge his deeds in the French and Indian War, which led to why Washington decision to agree to lead the colonial army against the British. In fact, if you look back. Jackson was the second war hero to become president after Washington himself.
Yeah, actually, if we're honest, Washington wasn't qualified for the presidency, as well, although He did the best he could. Making war heroes into presidents is never a good thing.
@@SamWinchester000 You do realize Washington is among the top three greatest US presidents in history by many historians along with Lincoln and FDR, right?
I think that Henry Clay didn't help himself by using his own dislike of Jackson in this election to override both the popular vote and the count in the Electoral College. The fact that Clay became Secretary of State after John Quincy Adams was declared the winner was a bit too much of a coincidence to Jackson's supporters to think it was all legit
Just think of, another decision of Clay would have formed a totally different party system. Because it was that corrupt bargain polarisation that motivated Jackson's supporters to found that whole new Democratic Party, and it was Clay who organised the predecessors of the Republican Party, only held together by his policy and their common hatred towards Jackson. If Clay would have helped or even passively joined Jackson's side there would have been no real reason to split the Democratic Republican Party. Adams would surely have stayed silent and retired as he was a very diplomatic guy. So, there would have been totally different motivations and events that would have led to the founding of another party.
To go from only a few percent of the population voting, or even just 1, to suddenly having a quarter of the population voting seems crazy. Is that because the previous figures also counted poor dudes who couldn't vote until now? or was there really such a surge in motivation for voting?
I'm guessing the previous figures counted people who couldn't vote. Also before this election some states nominated electors by state legislators instead of popular vote, less did so this election.
There was a clear winner in 2016, so no. If you really want to do comparisons than 2000 is the closest thing where the Supreme Court had to step to declare a winner.
John Quincy Adams started his career as a Federalist, like his father before him, but after the Hartford Convention disgraced the party beyond salvation in the eyes of many he and others like Daniel Webster jumped over to the Old Republican Party as it was the only viable option. Essentially creating a Federalist wing in the party that came to be known as the “National Republicans”. Their major rivals made up of Andrew Jackson and his followers would become known as the “Democratic Republicans”. That term now often gets applied to Jefferson’s party as a whole a lot of the time in order to distinguish it from the modern GOP. They wound up breaking later with the Democratic Republicans creating the Democratic Party and the National Republicans becoming a dominant faction within the large tented Whig Party. Another group that split from the Democrats during the Second Party System and joined the Whigs were the “Tertium Quids”, the “Third Something”. They were the conservative Southern planter elites in contrast to the Democratic Jeffersonian tradition, which Jacksonian Democracy was essentially a reformation within, who they formed a coalition with against the Federalists but would have friction between each other early on. The National Republicans became known as the “Conscience Whigs” and the Tertium Quids became known as “Cotton Whigs”. Both disliked Jackson’s strident populism and activist view of the presidency. Though the most pressing issue for the Conscience Whigs was his war on the National Bank while the final straw for the Cotton Whigs was when he showed his unionism by forcing South Carolina to yield to federal authority during the Nullification Crisis of 1832. The Whig Party wound up breaking over the issue of slavery awhile after Jackson’s death. Leading to the Conscience Whigs forming the core of the new Republican Party and the Cotton Whigs moving to merge with the Democratic Party. That wound up falling apart by the election of 1860 when they were dissatisfied with the Democratic nominee Stephen Douglas, who was committed to a popular sovereignty policy on the issue of slavery, and left to form the “Southern Democratic Party” and put up their own candidate with John C. Breckinridge. Though of course they wound up lumbering back into the official party after the Civil War. However, the tension would remain between the northern and southern factions including something of a repeat when the heirs to the Cotton Whigs broke off again in 1948 to form the “States’ Rights Democratic Party” after Harry S. Truman adopted Civil Rights into his platform and again put up their own candidate with Strom Thurmond.
Hello and how are you? I was wondering if you can make videos about the lesser known people who ran for president like about their lives and stuff some of the people you mentioned in this playlist I type in their name on the UA-cam search and nothing comes up I'm not very good at worrying about people by reading about their lives but I am a lot better at watching videos about them because of my dyslexia I'm using a speech to text app to write this comment hopefully it makes sense
_The Ultimate American Presidential Election Book: Every Presidential Election in American History (1788-2020)_ is now available! amzn.to/3aYiqwI
When you say "26% of the population voted in this election" is that percentage of the total population or eligible voters
You might want update that book now :)
the electors should have to use a ranked choice ballot. the house is a horrible place to 'settle' national elections.
To go from a unopposed to one of the most bitter and contentious election in four years is crazy.
the electors should have used a ranked choice ballot
I always notice this in America that after an era of unprecedented economic growth, social and political progress.
Even though Henry Clay lost four times, he is the only person to have a mountain in the presidential range named after him that was never president.
What about Mount Webster and Franklin?
RJ oof me. I got lied to.
@@RJ-xl2cd And Mt. Jackson, not named after Andrew Jackson
He actually lost five times, three times in the main contest (1824, 1832, 1844) and twice when he tried to get nominated (1840, 1848). 1828, when he supported Adam's reelection, and 1836, when the fresh Whig Party wasn't ready to nominate a real candidate for the whole nation and had 4 candidates, actually were the only times he didn't run for the presidency.
Jackson: So I won the most electoral votes right?
Clay: Yep
Jackson: And also the largest number of the population voted for me?
Clay: Mmm Hmmm
Jackson: Then that democratically makes me President!
Clay: Makes sense to me
Jackson: So make me President!
Clay: Nah
"We are a Republic and Not a Democracy."
@@12KevinPower Being a republic and being a democracy are not mutually exclusive. The US is both. The definition of a republic is a country with a non-hereditary head of state. The US is a republic and so is China as they do not have a hereditary head of state. The US is a democracy though while China is not.
@Get Ass no we aren't, we're a Federal Constitutional Republic
@Get Ass we have democratic values, but we are not a democracy
@@optimusmikey "Federal" means that it's not unitary or confederal. "Constitutional" means that it has a constitution... Which is what all Democracies have. And "republic" is usually used to describe Democratic or "I swear I'm Democratic" countries.
None of these contradict Democracy, two of them actually affirm it.
Fun fact: this was the last year we’d ever see a founding father as president, with Monroe stepping down upon the results of this election.
thanks Peach
@@MeesterTweester np
This may have been the Era of Good Feelings, but there weren't many good feelings between Jackson, Adams, and Clay.
You said it George!
@Harold Brick Lol. You got that right. I'm from Crawford, Georgia and I live right down the road from where he's buried. He's just a boring footnote though for sure lol.
And Calhoun. It seems like everybody hated Calhoun.
@Harold Brick oh u again
OMG IM A HUGE FAN!!!
1:03 "he had mismanaged his money." There's more to it than that. The debt came from his time as Governor of New York during the War of 1812 and he spent his own money to equip and pay the troops when the legislature wasn't in session or wouldn't approve the funds. The government partially reimbursed him in 1823 but not enough to get him out of financial trouble. Talk about a true leader
I'm really imagining how Jackson felt when he found out that he lost when he technically won. He might have wanted to duel the entire House after that.
At least he got his revenge later.
@@hiveleg
Unfortunately, he also took out his anger on the Native Americans too.
You go
@@alexanderrobins7497 Jackson was against Native Americans whether he won this election or not. John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay just gave the Native Americans more time before Jackson would have the chance to remove them.
@@alexanderrobins7497 all presidents did native Americans dirty.
Surprisingly jackson didn't challenge Clay to a duel
Pres. Jackson did, however, possibly say, "My only regrets are that I never shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun." Historians debate whether Pres. Jackson ever said this, though this missive would certainly fit his character.
One of the most interesting election in us history
Definitely!
Mr. Beat true
Hey couldn't you have won in 1912? Would've made the world a much better place
BRO. IMPOSTOR!!!!!
Spoiler!
-A republican somewhere
I love how we went from 1-4% to straight up a quarter of the population for how many voted
Somewhere in Delaware, a young Joe Biden was watching and was inspired.
Trump was also born that very same day.
@@danielpartida8224 a few years later
I don’t get it
@@OctoRang its funny because Joe Biden is insanely old
I think
@@somerandomasshole4561 yeah but what does that have to do with this
My history teacher advised me here...and i am not disappointed. 👏
to those other history buffs, does anyone else consider it ironic that at one point, Andrew Jackson and henry clay agreed on most issues
Yes, but they still hated each other....
Henry Clay is one of the most interesting people in American History
I would vote for John Quincy Adams because just like his father, he never owned slaves
Ya but that doesn’t effect how he performed on his presidency
Dude, you were totally right. Were we separated at birth? I'll show my cousin this channel for sure. Keep in touch man.
Fox Cousins Haha I know, right? I'll definitely keep in touch. :)
Mr. Beat so have y’all kept in touch?
@@Eclipse302able yeah. I saw some comments from both of them over the years.
@@BernardoSucksAtCallOuts what is this? Did Mr beat have a lost separated family?
John Adams was alive when his son became president.
He also died while his son was president
Keep in mind that Pres. Jackson lived to be 77 years old...
* in the 19th century
* after surviving smallpox
* with a bullet lodged in his chest
I can't help but wonder after how many time Clay tried to run for president after this election if the Corrupt Bargain also cursed him from winning future presidential elections. I mean, it's not like Clay wasn't popular as a candidate, but even when he made it to the main election he still ended up losing.
Polk's dark horse win and not winning the nomination against Harrison (once again due to war hero reasons) broke his necks. These were the only elections he had a real chance to win.
I love how the picture of clay shows him smirking like he out maneuvered his opponents in chess, because he did. The only man who could truly out pizza the hut lol.
Why am i outraged at a presidential election outcome feom 1824?
is you loving you legal yet
@@SiDjack thank you for that reference. History of the Entire World I guess is truly a gem
Albert Gallatin was the only founding father to have a picture taken of him.
I wish the 12th amendment was revised so that a runoff election takes place when there is no clear winner based on the electoral votes. Great video Mr. Beat!
The electors don't actually vote until December, so it would be really difficult to squeeze in another national election and corresponding electoral vote before Inauguration Day.
I've been asked by youTube to give some feedback on this video I rated it excellent it's informative in fact very! and I love hearing these classical pieces never heard that Schubert overture before thanks for introducing me to it! (Mind you, last night I couldn't help watching some of the 1960s clips just for fun Chubby Checker is a far cry from Beethoven's violin concerto :-D)
Beethoven Violin Concerto 1808 election; Chubby Checker 1960 "
Election (confusing) rundown:
Took place from: Oct. 25-Dec. 1 1824/Feb. 9 1825 (contingent)
Turnout: 26.9% (up 16.8% from 1820)
Members of the collage: 261
Elec. Votes needed to Win: 131
Candidates: Dem.-Rep. side: Incumbent Secretary of State John Quincy Adams from Massachusetts. Running Mate: Incumbent Secretary of War John C. Calhoun from South Carolina. Also Dem.-Rep. Side?: Incumbent Senator Andrew Jackson from Tennessee. Running Mate: Also John C. Calhoun. Also Dem.-Rep. Side: Incumbent Secretary of the Treasury William H. Crawford from Georgia. Running Mate: Incumbent Senator Nathaniel Macon from North Carolina. Incumbent House speaker Henry Clay from Kentucky. Running Mate: Former Senator Nathan Sanford from New York.
Elec. Votes: Jackson/Calhoun: 99. Adams/Calhoun: 84. Crawford/Macon: 41. Clay/Sanford: 37.
Delegate Count (contingent): Adams: 13. Jackson: 7. Crawford: 4.
Popular Vote: Jackson/Calhoun: 151,271/41.4%. Adams/Calhoun: 113,122/30.9%. Clay/Sanford: 47,351/13%. Crawford/Macon: 40,857/11.2%.
States Carried: Jackson/Calhoun: 12. Adams/Calhoun: 7. Clay/Sanford: 3. Crawford/Mason: 2.
Total Votes: 365,833
Fact for election: First time the popular vote winner didn’t win election and only time electoral vote winner didn’t win election.
I would’ve been pissed if I were Jackson too
Clay was the best option in every election he ran in
Yes, Clay 1000% deserved to be president, and it’s a damn shame that he was never elected.
6:26 make that now 5
This was made before the 2016 Election
So I am listening to an audiobook biography of Henry Clay that really goes into detail about this election, particularly the "less than fully corrupt bargain." And also into how Henry Clay was a lawyer who enjoyed theatrics in the courtroom. Henry Clay biography video one of these days? In the spirit of Franklin Pierce bios, perhaps...
just realized henry clay is attractive af.
I like his "Bitch please" look on his face!
Lol why is everyone attracted to Henry clay.
Too bad he kept losing elections lmao
Nah you lowkey got a point…
Shout out from the South Bronx, NY. Love this series, Keep it up!
David Lopez Awesome! Thanks for sharing, David. Glad you are digging them.
I love the Series
James Monroe: *Eats Popcorn In Background*
0:49 Fun fact: Daniel Tompkins was the only Vice President from the 19th century to serve two full terms under one president. In fact, only nine Vice Presidents (Adams, Tompkins, Marshall, Garner, Nixon, Bush, Gore, Cheney and Biden) have served two full terms under one president.
A lot of Vice President dying or becoming president
A fun fact about every single presidential election
This was the first presidential election to have candidates to be born as a American Citizen
Fun fact: this was the first election in which President Joe Biden voted in.
I kinda like how the music somehow fits the election
John Quincy Adams is one of my favorite 15 presidents, personally.
Was he corrupt at all? Just curious because of the way this election went down
I would love to see someone do a series like this, but for the uk/England elections.
But nobody cares about the shitk
I'd watch that
Crawford was incacipated by a stroke but he still did better then clay
This election and the first election that Thomas Jefferson won his presidency and I think we’re the only ones that came down to the house deciding who was president.
3 Soon-to-be Presidents in 1 election
Actually 2, Crawford and Clay never became president
Jona Boktr Martin van buren also became president then so I guess it is 3
Bye Federalists! Oh wait, I'm a bit late for this aren't I? 1816 maybe?
I'd love to see something like this, but for notable governor, city mayor, or Congressional elections
Like with the 1998 Minnesota Gubernatorial Election
At least Quincy Adams was anti-slavery
After this, 1968 and 2020 have been the only other times the House came close to having to decide: Had AK, DE, MO, NV, and WI opted for Humphrey in '68; and had AZ, GA, and WI opted for "45" in '20...
What do you mean 2020 was close to going to the house? It was less close than 2016 for God's sake
@Conor1_23 True - in terms of nationwide popular vote ~
(However, many votes came from CA, NY, IL, and NJ - garnering extra votes that did not yield in more _electoral votes_ !)
@@bonghunezhou5051 what I was referring to was yes, the popular vote, but also how Biden got GA & AZ while still winning back the MI, WI & PA states, so having more votes than Clinton EVEN IF she got MI WI & PA
John Calhoun and Henry Clay are... oddly attractive.
+Ryan Quinn Calhoun didn't age that well later on lol
Hmmm... didn't Clay & Adams support the Second National Bank? Pres. Jackson vetoed the re-charter of the Bank, though. Perhaps the candidates weren't too far apart on other issues, but the Bank's existence was a BIG issue!
Here's what should have happened.
Andrew Jackson: "Oh Senator Calhoun. Did you hear from that Lincoln boy at all?"
John C. Calhoun: "Oh ummmmm... I know nothing of him. I'm gonna leave the cabinet. Bye!"
What’s interesting with this election is that Clay got more votes than Crawford, popular vote wise, but failed to get more electoral votes than him. Had clay gotten 3rd place, he most likely would’ve won this election
Yeah, isn't it interesting how Crawford's very irrelevant candidacy totally changed history?
Although he was only mentioned briefly in this video fun fact I am a direct descendant of Albert Gallatin from grandmother
Jackson was Robbed!!
Who cares he eventually becomes a 2 term president while Quincy becomes a 1 term prwsident thanks to Jackson. I'd say that it's a win-win for Andrew.
5:33 I mean he's not wrong and I would even agree.
Shut up redcoat
5:39 ironic quote considering clay spearheaded the war in congress
Good catch, but I think the quote was more about his elitism since he probably saw Jackson as lowly soldier "commoner".
“Andrew Jackson was shocked”
I believe you misspelled “Pissed”
Rest in peace DT
It's hard to not feel it's unfair when popular vote winner doesn't win the presidency (and/or when plurality winner doesn't still win) and yet it has happened both long ago and recently and people do complain about it but not enough to actually change the law.
2:51 he himself was a president
I mean Federlist
If Jackson won as president AND vice, that would be cool.
u taught me more than my history teacher has thank mr.beat!
A "corrupt bargain," says the guy who would go on to popularize the Spoils System.
6:47 wow that voice good voice lol
10th election 6th prez.John Quincy Adams, the first “Dark Horse”? I guess not, 12th amendment was his pathway. Jackson was screwed 😆.... “The Corrupt Bargain” John C Calhoun won in a separate election for VP. Strange one party election!
Thanks for the post 👍
My favorite Election
Great series. I bet I’m your only fan in Macau, China.
I live a mere yards away from where Crawford is buried. Not much of an interesting guy, but hell....there he is every day when I got to work lol.
Actually, I think his life would be very interesting if his personal papers wouldn't all have been destroyed in a fire. That's why almost no biography of him exists (the last one being from the 60s I think and using interesting sources from the papers of friends, contemporaries and opponents, which was enough to paint a fairly full picture of him), while he actually was one of the most important politicians already as a very young man (I think even the youngest senator) during the era when the founders dominated everything.
He became prominent when he argued against the abolition of the National Bank under Jefferson. Afterwards, the presidents all (Madison, Monroe, Adams) desperately wanted him in their administrations, Madison wanted him as war secretary for the War of 1812, but he first declined because actually he strongly opposed the war. That's why then becoming Minister to France, trying to work for peace, was the perfect job for him. After the war had ended, he finally accepted Adam's renewed offer as war secretary in 1815 and succeeded famous James Monroe if I remember it right. Then in the 1816 election (with the Federalists now being irrelevant) he, the young cabinet newbie, and Monroe, the huge founding father, became the major rivals for the presidency and the presidential nomination. Even though Mr. Beat said in his video that Crawford had no chance and Monroe would have kicked butt, it is a well-known fact that many Democratic-Republicans disliked or even hated Monroe before he became president, and the official result of the nominating caucus was somewehere like 87 votes for Monroe and 83 for Crawford. This doesn't look like a butt-kick for me, in fact it was the first narrow presidential nomination result in American history (Jefferson and Madison were the founders of the party, so they had almost unanimous support in their caucuses). The congressional caucus was already heavily critisised as an undemocratic, exclusive nominating body back then, but before 1824 its result was accepeted as the official party nomination. Crawford nearly would have been the fifth president!
After one year in the war department and out of the presidential race, he was promoted to treasury secretary shortly before the 1816 election for the remainder of Madison's term, which actually set the stage for his largest achievement. Monroe wasn't resentful of their rivalry and his near defeat to Crawford, and to Crawford's own surprise (he already was on the way to return home) Monroe kept him in the treasury during his whole administration. Crawford reorganised the whole treasury department, which had been a mess and the secend largest government department after the state department, and built it into a modern, well-organised department in his more than 8 years. Of course this wasn't anything which made headlines, but according to his biographer the treasury still benefited from that a century later. After 8 years in Monroe's administration and as he had been Monroe's strongest contender 8 years before, he was one of the foremost leaders in the party hierarchy now according to his biographer, maybe even number one (which explains why the last congressional caucus ever nominated him as official party candidate), so it was ony logical that he ran for president again, this time with a whole run, but he was unlucky because 1816, when he narrowly lost against Monroe, had been the last time the people accepted the congressional caucus, while in 1824 it was finally discredited, and regional, more popular candidates had been successfully nominated by state legislatures. (1820 had been a formality as Monroe already was president and almost nobody was present during the caucus.)
When Adams (who is famous for selecting his personnel solely for competence and not for political reasons or party) became president, he ALSO wanted to keep Crawford in his administration as the third successive president and tried to persuade him, but this time Crawford, although he had well recovered from his stroke, refused and insisted on going home and ending his career. If he wanted, he could have started his own party, the Crawford Republicans, like Adams's and Clay's National Republicans and Jackson's Jacksonian Democrats, but he wasn't such a strategic politician like Clay and Jackson. His supporters wanted him to run as president or vice president in 1828 and even 1832, but he didn't want.
Crawford was one of the most important politicians of his time at an extremely young age (he was 44 in his 1816 run!) and very talented and respected for his argumentation, but he lost on almost every battle or issue he is known for, the continuation of the National Bank, the opposition to the War of 1812, the 1816 party nomination and the 1824 election, leaving him only one lasting legacy, that of a good civil servant in government, which isn't exactly what makes history books go wild.
@@SamWinchester000 That's a lot more interesting than his wiki article lol, I haven't delved into local resources yet, but I know there's a pretty solid collection of materials at the county library
What's interesting to me is that he was always in the mix with prominent early American figures and such, but he's an obscure figure that doesn't have that sexy historical story to tell, as you pointed out...but as far as local history goes, quite revealing. As well known as the town named after him in GA
Dude that election sounds totally ridged but at the end
Yay I'm -212 years old
I did math and it said 2036, damn there’s a time traveller.
3:55 There is no "h" at the end of "Weird Al" Yankovic's name
1:09 he died 10 days before his 51st birthday
Would this be an example of “quid pro quo”?
Yes
One has to note that nowadays current historians do not believe that the famous "corrupt bargain" ever existed. It was a rumour spread by Jackson's side long before Adams selected his secretaries and designed to preemptively destroy him and especially Clay. Adams is notoriously famous for his extremely correct and clean, unpolitical government service, which makes such a deal unrealistic. Clay was in a terrible dilemma when he was offered the office for his qualification because he actually wanted it but he knew that after this rumoured stories nobody would believe him that it wasn't the price of a deal, which would have to ultimately force him to refuse the office Adams would have given him anyway. He decided to accept the office and stand the accusations.
The claim of the corrupt bargain dominated the public eye for the next four years, let the Jacksonians notoriously only work completely destructively and pretty much do nothing useful in congress for four years, only passing senseless propaganda designed to accuse the government and win the next election, which is why Adams is one of the least successful presidents ever. All that helped godfather Jackson to clearly win the next election, after sabotaging his predecessor for the whole term.
To be honest, it's absurd how Jackson denounced one of the cleanest government officials America ever hade, while abusing the system himself and only filling it with propaganda for four years.The saddest thing is that these invented accusations were percieved as safe information and persisted for almost 200 years.
6:03 thanks for mentioning me
Why did you get us involved in Iraq
@@whyareyoureadingthis5308 we needed to capture Sadam Hussein
Henry Clay does realize Washington was a war hero from the American Revolution, Right? Added that and his time in the French and Indiana he killed many enemy soldiers for the cause of the war he fought in, even if the British refuse to acknowledge his deeds in the French and Indian War, which led to why Washington decision to agree to lead the colonial army against the British. In fact, if you look back. Jackson was the second war hero to become president after Washington himself.
Yeah, actually, if we're honest, Washington wasn't qualified for the presidency, as well, although He did the best he could. Making war heroes into presidents is never a good thing.
@@SamWinchester000 You do realize Washington is among the top three greatest US presidents in history by many historians along with Lincoln and FDR, right?
I think that Henry Clay didn't help himself by using his own dislike of Jackson in this election to override both the popular vote and the count in the Electoral College. The fact that Clay became Secretary of State after John Quincy Adams was declared the winner was a bit too much of a coincidence to Jackson's supporters to think it was all legit
Just think of, another decision of Clay would have formed a totally different party system. Because it was that corrupt bargain polarisation that motivated Jackson's supporters to found that whole new Democratic Party, and it was Clay who organised the predecessors of the Republican Party, only held together by his policy and their common hatred towards Jackson.
If Clay would have helped or even passively joined Jackson's side there would have been no real reason to split the Democratic Republican Party. Adams would surely have stayed silent and retired as he was a very diplomatic guy. So, there would have been totally different motivations and events that would have led to the founding of another party.
the clapping scared the heck out of me omg haha
How did they manage to make clay look so smug in a painting?
To go from only a few percent of the population voting, or even just 1, to suddenly having a quarter of the population voting seems crazy. Is that because the previous figures also counted poor dudes who couldn't vote until now? or was there really such a surge in motivation for voting?
I'm guessing the previous figures counted people who couldn't vote. Also before this election some states nominated electors by state legislators instead of popular vote, less did so this election.
I love the Topic of presidents I watched the Whig video and the assassination of Lincoln so plese
+jb14998 and friends Awesome, well I also have songs about all the Presidents, and you can download them for free.
1:50 Umm... Smith Thompson was a Supreme Court Justice from 1823-43.
Was this the OG #notmypresident election?
I think this election may have been a factor as to why National Conventions became a thing.
yo this happened EXACTLY 196 YEARS AGO!!!
1824 was so 2016-ee.
There was a clear winner in 2016, so no. If you really want to do comparisons than 2000 is the closest thing where the Supreme Court had to step to declare a winner.
Btw, Adams was the President of the US with the highest IQ
Do you have a video for the 2016 election?
Hedoes
Henry clay is my relative
Curious. How so?
Dang. Had Andrew won, Rachel would’ve been First Lady. But no.
Could something like this happen with Trump-Biden on Jan 6th?
Can you keep doing these
The 2024 presidential election hasn't happened yet
@@RandomVidsforthought wait he's done all the presidents so far?
@@jonathanmck2835 Yeah
about 350,000 voted 1824 election.1828 election which Jackson won again 1,100,000 voted to make sure no shenanigans (corruption)
Wait if Adams is considered a federalist and Clay helped him get elected doesn’t that mean clay is a federalist
Wasen't Quincy Adams a democratic-republican?
Henry Clay and later Abraham Lincoln were essentially heirs to the Federalist tradition after the party faded out.
Michael 27 Adams was a Democratic-Republican,however he got votes from traditional federalist states
@@Lubbock_Kid1959 oh, that makes sense.
John Quincy Adams started his career as a Federalist, like his father before him, but after the Hartford Convention disgraced the party beyond salvation in the eyes of many he and others like Daniel Webster jumped over to the Old Republican Party as it was the only viable option. Essentially creating a Federalist wing in the party that came to be known as the “National Republicans”. Their major rivals made up of Andrew Jackson and his followers would become known as the “Democratic Republicans”. That term now often gets applied to Jefferson’s party as a whole a lot of the time in order to distinguish it from the modern GOP. They wound up breaking later with the Democratic Republicans creating the Democratic Party and the National Republicans becoming a dominant faction within the large tented Whig Party.
Another group that split from the Democrats during the Second Party System and joined the Whigs were the “Tertium Quids”, the “Third Something”. They were the conservative Southern planter elites in contrast to the Democratic Jeffersonian tradition, which Jacksonian Democracy was essentially a reformation within, who they formed a coalition with against the Federalists but would have friction between each other early on. The National Republicans became known as the “Conscience Whigs” and the Tertium Quids became known as “Cotton Whigs”. Both disliked Jackson’s strident populism and activist view of the presidency. Though the most pressing issue for the Conscience Whigs was his war on the National Bank while the final straw for the Cotton Whigs was when he showed his unionism by forcing South Carolina to yield to federal authority during the Nullification Crisis of 1832.
The Whig Party wound up breaking over the issue of slavery awhile after Jackson’s death. Leading to the Conscience Whigs forming the core of the new Republican Party and the Cotton Whigs moving to merge with the Democratic Party. That wound up falling apart by the election of 1860 when they were dissatisfied with the Democratic nominee Stephen Douglas, who was committed to a popular sovereignty policy on the issue of slavery, and left to form the “Southern Democratic Party” and put up their own candidate with John C. Breckinridge. Though of course they wound up lumbering back into the official party after the Civil War. However, the tension would remain between the northern and southern factions including something of a repeat when the heirs to the Cotton Whigs broke off again in 1948 to form the “States’ Rights Democratic Party” after Harry S. Truman adopted Civil Rights into his platform and again put up their own candidate with Strom Thurmond.
Turnout in the 1820 election: 1.34%
Turnout in the 1824 election: 26.9%
Insane difference
Clay for president 1824
Skrub Boy No Adams for President 1824.
MajorGeneral
No! Andrew Jackson For President 1824!
CLAY!!!!!!! Adams is a rich snob; Crawford is half-dead; and Jackson is a murderous ruffian!
Clay is a election loser!! Adams for president!!
Is it the 10th presidential elections or 6th because John Quincy Adam’s was the 6th president 1825 to 1829.
It was the 10th due to some of the presidents before this election having more than 1 term
What is the Background Score Music ?
Schubert- Overture to the magic harp, D.644
Personally, my favourite election to look at was 1792
I think this is the 2nd most election important besides 1860.
Hello and how are you?
I was wondering if you can make videos about the lesser known people who ran for president like about their lives and stuff some of the people you mentioned in this playlist I type in their name on the UA-cam search and nothing comes up
I'm not very good at worrying about people by reading about their lives but I am a lot better at watching videos about them because of my dyslexia I'm using a speech to text app to write this comment hopefully it makes sense
Whats the point of getting the majority of electoral votes? Who has the most wins, and that's it. No house deciding anything