What do you feel the LEAST important election of US history is?

[darklordoftech]

I thought this would be an interesting twist.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

With hindsight, perhaps 1880. I could see a case for 1976, if it weren't for Reagan's primary bid.

[SingingAnalyst]

Since WWII, I'd say 1956.

No new electoral ground was broken. Vintage voting habits persisted. The white South rebelled to an extent with a variety of splinter movements, but not nearly to the extent or with the organization of 1948.

The main issues were (if I understand correctly) the little-understood Suez Canal controversy and Eisenhower's health (he had suffered a minor heart attack the previous year). I guess it will go down mainly as the only rematch in history.

Other candidates include 1976, 1988, and 1996.

[Skill and Chance]

I would say there are 3 main criteria:

1. Generally good economic times

2. The 1st and 2nd place candidates are ideologically similar, lack of landmark legislation in the following presidential term, lack of landmark 5/4 or 6/3 SCOTUS decisions

3. Doesn't decide US involvement in a major war or a major expansion of US territory

Tier 1: 1820, 1924 (assuming LaFollette doesn't win), 1956, 1996 (assuming Perot doesn't win)

Tier 2: 1816, 1884 (tariff fights seem pretty important, though), 1952 (depending on how Stevenson would have reacted to Brown v. Board), 2004 (assuming Republicans still hold the Senate in a Kerry victory)

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I would say there are 2 main criteria:

1. Generally good economic times

2. The 1st and 2nd place candidates are ideologically similar, lack of landmark legislation in the following presidential term, lack of landmark 5/4 or 6/3 SCOTUS decisions

3. Doesn't decide US involvement in a major war or a major expansion of US territory

Tier 1: 1820, 1924 (assuming LaFollette doesn't win), 1956, 1996 (assuming Perot doesn't win)

Tier 2: 1816, 1884 (tariff fights seem pretty important, though), 1952 (depending on how Stevenson would have reacted to Brown v. Board), 2004 (assuming Republicans still hold the Senate in a Kerry victory)

I considered 1884, but considering how important that election was to Theodore Roosevelt's political development (and to the Republican Party generally) decided against it.

[Skill and Chance]

I would say there are 2 main criteria:

1. Generally good economic times

2. The 1st and 2nd place candidates are ideologically similar, lack of landmark legislation in the following presidential term, lack of landmark 5/4 or 6/3 SCOTUS decisions

3. Doesn't decide US involvement in a major war or a major expansion of US territory

Tier 1: 1820, 1924 (assuming LaFollette doesn't win), 1956, 1996 (assuming Perot doesn't win)

Tier 2: 1816, 1884 (tariff fights seem pretty important, though), 1952 (depending on how Stevenson would have reacted to Brown v. Board), 2004 (assuming Republicans still hold the Senate in a Kerry victory)

I considered 1884, but considering how important that election was to Theodore Roosevelt's political development (and to the Republican Party generally) decided against it.

Strangely, 1884 seems more important in light of 2016: tariffs/free trade as a major issue, incumbent party candidate accused of financial/civil service corruption, challenger accused of mistreatment of women, and the election was possibly swung by single major news story in the final week of the campaign!

[Tetro Kornbluth]

1820.

[dw93]

Since WWII, I'd say 1956.

No new electoral ground was broken. Vintage voting habits persisted. The white South rebelled to an extent with a variety of splinter movements, but not nearly to the extent or with the organization of 1948.

The main issues were (if I understand correctly) the little-understood Suez Canal controversy and Eisenhower's health (he had suffered a minor heart attack the previous year). I guess it will go down mainly as the only rematch in history.

Other candidates include 1976, 1988, and 1996.

This, but 2004 is possibly a candidate as well.

[The Mikado]

The main issues were (if I understand correctly) the little-understood Suez Canal controversy and Eisenhower's health (he had suffered a minor heart attack the previous year). I guess it will go down mainly as the only rematch in history.

1900 was also a rematch.

Also a candidate for least-important election.

[Skill and Chance]

The main issues were (if I understand correctly) the little-understood Suez Canal controversy and Eisenhower's health (he had suffered a minor heart attack the previous year). I guess it will go down mainly as the only rematch in history.

1900 was also a rematch.

Also a candidate for least-important election.

I wouldn't put any of the William Jennings Bryan elections on this list.  If he ever won, we would get a very Christian version of the New Deal 25-40 years early.  Provided there was a Dem congress for at least 2 years (which was much easier than getting a Dem elected president at the time), his impact would be fundamental on American culture. 

[Orser67]

1880, 1884, and 1888 were all unimportant. 1892 would be up there too except for the fact that the winner got saddled with the Panic of 1893.

1924, 1948, 1956, and 1988 are also up there.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

1996 is a solid contender.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

1820: Monroe runs unopposed.

Also, 1792 was pretty unimportant. I'd also say 1984.

A case could be made for 1944.

[OSR stands with Israel]

1996

[Tartarus Sauce]

1820 is definitely a top contender.

[President Johnson]

1924, with two right-wingers running.