Political Landscape of 1836

• National parties in the U.S. comprised coalitions that represented voters across various regions.
• The Whig Party, though newly formed, failed to finalize a single candidate for the presidency.
• The Democrats, meanwhile, nominated Martin Van Buren, Andrew Jackson's vice president, continuing the Democratic line from Jackson, who limited himself to two terms.

Whig Strategy and Election Results

• The Whigs ran three candidates:
  • William Henry Harrison (Old Northwest)
  • Alexander White (South)
  • Daniel Webster (New England)
• Their strategy mirrored John Quincy Adams' win in 1824 by aiming to transfer the election decision to the House of Representatives.
• In popular vote: Whigs - 49% and Van Buren - 50%, but electoral outcomes were decisive with Van Buren winning at 58%.

Challenges During Van Buren's Presidency (1837-1841)

• The Panic of 1837, an economic depression, became a major issue during his term.
• The crisis was partially attributed to Jackson’s dismantling of the Second National Bank, leading to unstable wildcat banks and subsequent failures.
• Public sentiment blamed Van Buren and the Democrats for the economic downturn, amplifying political cartoons illustrating suffering families due to financial hardships.

Rise of the Whig Party (1840 Election)

• The Whigs organized a National Convention for the first time to nominate a single candidate.
• They chose William Henry Harrison, a military hero, to appeal to a broad electorate, with John Tyler as his running mate to outreach the South.
• The campaign effectively portrayed Harrison as a man of the people (e.g., log cabin imagery).
• The Whig campaign tactics included music, newspapers, and social gatherings which emphasized Harrison's relatability to common folk.

Election Outcomes and the Second Party System (1840-1854)

• Harrison won the presidency with 53% of the popular vote and a decisive 80% in the electoral college against Van Buren.
• Following this, elections between Whigs and Democrats remained closely contested, all avoiding the issue of slavery, which risked dividing their parties.

Emergence of Sectional Tensions Over Slavery

• Early legislative efforts like the Missouri Compromise of 1820 aimed to maintain a balance between slave and free states.
• The compromise allowed Missouri as a slave state while Maine entered as a free state, with a dividing line set at 36°30'.
• Thomas Jefferson expressed concerns regarding this line, foreseeing long-term divisions among states.

Annexation of Texas and Political Consequences

• Texas, originally settled by Americans under Mexico, declared independence in 1836 and sought annexation to the U.S.
• Northerners opposed Texas' entry due to concerns over the balance of political power in the Senate.
• John Tyler pushed for the annexation amid contentious feelings, with North fearing the implications of adding more slave states.

The Wilmot Proviso and Precursor to Civil War

• The Wilmot Proviso attempted to prevent slavery in territories acquired after the Mexican War, passing in the House but failing in the Senate.
• Opposition included motivations rooted in maintaining economic power and preserving social status for white laborers in the North, along with abolitionist sentiments.

The Compromise of 1850

• Proposed by Henry Clay, it allowed California to enter as a free state and established popular sovereignty in new territories (Utah and New Mexico).
• Added a stronger Fugitive Slave Law, causing backlash in the North creating confusion and tension over legal interpretations.
• The failure to adequately address interpretations of the Constitution related to slavery led to further sectional divides, contributing to the eventual descent into the Civil War.