Who Would Be America's Royal Family?

[Lincoln Republican]

If the U.S. were to become a constitutional monarchy, which family should become the royal family?

Please discuss.

[Хahar 🤔]

Hard to say. The idea of a royal family is too alien.

[Lief 🗽]

The Baldwins. Duh.

[Lincoln Republican]

How about America's first billionaires, the Rockefellers?

[Boris]

My family, obviously.

[True Democrat]

Kennedys, of course.  Everyone knows that.

[Gabu]

Obviously the Clintons.

[Verily]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=61177.0

[J. J.]

Hard to say. The idea of a royal family is too alien.

Considering I'm getting my Sons of the American Revolution application ready, I don't think it is too alien. 

I think the main question would be when the Monarchy would be established.  It's possible that the in 1787 the United States could have gone into a monarchy.  Would we elevate Washington to George I of America?  How about the House of Adams in succession which is still around(which includes Na'Toth in B5)?  Or the House of Lee which was of royal ancestry (Robert E. Lee has more than 20 direct descendants, and he was a younger son)?

A second possibility would have been to elevate a pro-American English noble to the throne of Anerica, such as the Duke of Grafton, an descendant of one of Charles II's bastards.

A third possibility would have been to choose a German or Danish princeling, anticipating the 19th Century practice.  Probably a Catholic could not have been chosen, at the time (though the Bourbons were pro American).

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Kennedys (scary thought).

[Verily]

Hard to say. The idea of a royal family is too alien.

Considering I'm getting my Sons of the American Revolution application ready, I don't think it is too alien. 

I think the main question would be when the Monarchy would be established.  It's possible that the in 1787 the United States could have gone into a monarchy.  Would we elevate Washington to George I of America?  How about the House of Adams in succession which is still around(which includes Na'Toth in B5)?  Or the House of Lee which was of royal ancestry (Robert E. Lee has more than 20 direct descendants, and he was a younger son)?

A second possibility would have been to elevate a pro-American English noble to the throne of Anerica, such as the Duke of Grafton, an descendant of one of Charles II's bastards.

A third possibility would have been to choose a German or Danish princeling, anticipating the 19th Century practice.  Probably a Catholic could not have been chosen, at the time (though the Bourbons were pro American).

The Marquis de Lafayette would have been a popular enough choice, however, though whether he'd have been willing to leave France is something else entirely. (His absence from France would also have made the early stages of the French Revolution much more... interesting.)

[J. J.]

Hard to say. The idea of a royal family is too alien.

Considering I'm getting my Sons of the American Revolution application ready, I don't think it is too alien. 

I think the main question would be when the Monarchy would be established.  It's possible that the in 1787 the United States could have gone into a monarchy.  Would we elevate Washington to George I of America?  How about the House of Adams in succession which is still around(which includes Na'Toth in B5)?  Or the House of Lee which was of royal ancestry (Robert E. Lee has more than 20 direct descendants, and he was a younger son)?

A second possibility would have been to elevate a pro-American English noble to the throne of Anerica, such as the Duke of Grafton, an descendant of one of Charles II's bastards.

A third possibility would have been to choose a German or Danish princeling, anticipating the 19th Century practice.  Probably a Catholic could not have been chosen, at the time (though the Bourbons were pro American).

The Marquis de Lafayette would have been a popular enough choice, however, though whether he'd have been willing to leave France is something else entirely. (His absence from France would also have made the early stages of the French Revolution much more... interesting.)

Very good possibility, even if Catholic.  Again, there are descendants alive today. 

Interestingly the Society of the Cincinnati, which included Washington, was, and is, on a male line hereditary principle (as was much criticized for that).

What is interesting is that a lot were very anti-slavery, so the 19th Century may have been more interesting (with no Civil War as such).

[Platypus]

I'd make it a national lottery, a la the Vietnam draft.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

As said above, the Baldwins, they have a delightful blend of eccentrics and nutcases, and they're all funny upstairs.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I thought America already has two royal families.

We only have to arrange a marriage between Chelsea and one of the Bush boys (George P.?) now and in no less then five generations we will be able to breed the KWISATZ HADERACH. Mark my words.

[Wakie]

Washington was a popular choice to be king but he had no male heir.  An argument could be made for the Adams family though (as in John and John Quincy, not Uncle Fester and Gomez).

In that case you have a monarchy which goes as follows:

King John I - 1776 - 1826
King John II (Quincy) - 1826 - 1848

JQA's eldest son George drowned in 1829 but his eldest son would have been next in line.

King Jacob I - 1848 - ?? (assumed around 1876)
King Hoxsie I (yes, his eldest son's name was Hoxsie) - 1876 - 1910

after 1910 the trail goes cold.

[jokerman]

The solution to Washington's lack of heir is simple: he adopts Hamilton.  Washington always treated him like a son.

[J. J.]

Washington was a popular choice to be king but he had no male heir.  An argument could be made for the Adams family though (as in John and John Quincy, not Uncle Fester and Gomez).

In that case you have a monarchy which goes as follows:

King John I - 1776 - 1826
King John II (Quincy) - 1826 - 1848

JQA's eldest son George drowned in 1829 but his eldest son would have been next in line.

King Jacob I - 1848 - ?? (assumed around 1876)
King Hoxsie I (yes, his eldest son's name was Hoxsie) - 1876 - 1910

after 1910 the trail goes cold.

Hoxie had a son, Ben Neil, who had four daughters (at least one was still alive in the 2000's).  It looks like there would be grandson named Lightsey, possibly Dudley Lightsey.

Benjamin I, 1910-15

Frederick Dudley, 1915-16 (5 years old)

Queen Zella, 1916-76 (sister)

Queen Lois, 1976-91 (sister)

Possibly a grandson, son of Charles Dudley Lightsey (consort, died 1967)

If no direct heirs, the current Queen would be Ruth (b. 1914), and 93.

I think Hoxie might have had some male line cousins.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Probably the Rockefellers

[J. J.]

If succession through the female was not permitted, the line might have passed to the descendants of Charles Francis Adams.  There was a "Charles Francis Adams V" at Harvard in the 1990-2000's.  His father, a noted Charles IV, was president of Raytheon and his grandfather, Charles III, was Secretary of the Navy, and a noted yachtsman.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

The Rockefeller's
The Kennedy's
The Bush's
The Adam's
The Washington's

Either one of them would be America's Royalist Family.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The issue as pointed out is how Monarchy is created in the US.

I don't think the Kennedy's could be in any real circumstance - self-made riches with a background in Irish peasantry. I doubt it.

It's not all about Money, it wasn't until Edward IV that the English King had personal wealth even close to that of the richest noble... but position.

Who would have been in the right position at the right time?

[J. J.]

The Rockefeller's
The Kennedy's
The Bush's
The Adam's
The Washington's

Either one of them would be America's Royalist Family.

The Rockefellers were not even prominent until after the Civil War.  John D.'s father was a traveling salesman.

The Kennedy family only came here during the Irish Potato Famine.

The Bushes didn't become prominent until the early 20th Century.  At the time of the Revolution, Timothy Bush, Jr. was a blacksmith.

Washington, as noted, had no natural children.  It's believed he was sterile.  Unless there was an adoptive child, that line ends.

In terms of a natural born family, that leaves the Adams family on the list (which might have made the Addams Family a great political satire).

I wonder if the Lees could have been included.

[Verily]

The issue as pointed out is how Monarchy is created in the US.

I don't think the Kennedy's could be in any real circumstance - self-made riches with a background in Irish peasantry. I doubt it.

It's not all about Money, it wasn't until Edward IV that the English King had personal wealth even close to that of the richest noble... but position.

Who would have been in the right position at the right time?

As I've pointed out, only the Washingtons, Adamses or Lafayettes were in the right place early on (though the Adamses would be much more likely as adopted heirs of the Washingtons rather than as the original family in their own right).

[J. J.]

The issue as pointed out is how Monarchy is created in the US.

I don't think the Kennedy's could be in any real circumstance - self-made riches with a background in Irish peasantry. I doubt it.

It's not all about Money, it wasn't until Edward IV that the English King had personal wealth even close to that of the richest noble... but position.

Who would have been in the right position at the right time?

As I've pointed out, only the Washingtons, Adamses or Lafayettes were in the right place early on (though the Adamses would be much more likely as adopted heirs of the Washingtons rather than as the original family in their own right).

If were talking about alternate history, the American Monarchy may not have been established in 1776, or 1787-8.

I can see this situation.  In 1800-16 some great political crisis sweeps the country, discrediting both the Federalist and the Democratic-Republicans.  Political leaders meet to redraft the Constitution to establish a monarchy.  At that point, the Adams family might have been discredited

Basically, there was an experiment in democracy that failed.  A lot of depends on when the experiment fails.  I've read one alternate history where Arron Burr becomes president and then king.