Henry clay and John C calhoun were known as what?
War Hawks during the War of 1812.
Henry Clay’s American System?
Henry Clay, Sr. (April 12, 1777 – June 29, 1852) was a nineteenth-century American statesman and orator who represented Kentucky in both the House of Representatives and Senate. He was a dominant figure in both the Second Party System to 1824, and the Third Party System after that. Known as "The Great Compromiser" for his ability to bring others to agreement, he was the founder and leader of the Whig Party and a leading advocate of programs for modernizing the economy, especially tariffs to protect industry, a national bank, and internal improvements to promote canals, ports and railroads. As a War Hawk in Congress demanding the War of 1812, Clay made an immediate impact in his first congressional term, including becoming the Speaker of the House. Although his multiple attempts at the presidency were unsuccessful, to a large extent he defined the issues of the Second Party System. He was a major supporter of the American system, and had success in brokering compromises on the slavery issue, especially in 1820 and 1850. He was part of the "Great Triumvirate", or the "Immortal Trio", along with his colleagues Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun. In 1957 a Senate committee chaired by John F. Kennedy named Clay as one of the five greatest Senators in American history.[1] More info at below link
Suppose we have four presidential candidates competing for the White House. Does one have to have the majority of the Electoral College, or what?
To be elected president (or vice president, for that matter), a candidate must receive a majority of electoral votes. Since there are currently 538 electoral votes available, the winner needs to get at least 270 votes.The last time more than two candidates received electoral votes was in 1968, when George Wallace won some Southern states running on a Dixiecrat/segregationist ticket. Since then, every state in every election has been won by either the Democratic or Republican candidate, meaning one of the two candidates has been guaranteed to get a majority of electoral votes (notwithstanding the occasional “faithless elector” who casts their vote for some other person; this has never actually affected the winner’s ability to secure a majority of electoral votes).The exact situation contemplated in the question - a four way split in the electoral vote, with no candidate winning a majority - has happened once, in 1824, under a fairly unique partisan situation. In the aftermath of the War of 1812, the old Federalist Party basically collapsed, struggling to run a campaign in the 1816 election and then disbanding altogether, leaving the Democratic-Republican James Monroe to run for reelection unopposed in 1820. When Monroe prepared to retire in 1824, there was no clear successor. Four Democratic-Republicans ran and received electoral votes. Andrew Jackson secured a plurality, but no candidate got a majority. As the Constitution requires, it fell to the U.S. House of Representatives to choose a president from among the top three electoral vote-getters. The House ended up choosing John Quincy Adams, who had actually come in second place to Jackson. Jackson and his supporters, understandably outraged, organized the beginnings of the modern Democratic Party and returned to defeat Adams in 1828.The provision that led the House to make Adams president over Jackson in 1824 is still in force, meaning that a four-way split (or any split in which no candidate got a majority of electoral votes) would be settled the same way, with the House choosing from among the top three recipients. (The electoral college also chooses the vice president; in the event that no candidate receives a majority of the votes for vice president, the U.S. Senate chooses a winner there.)
Who were the political leaders in the Southern United States during the 1820s?
Off the top of my head, I would say John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, Andrew Jackson, John Eaton. William Freehling wrote the very readable The Road to Disunion, which presented portraits of many of the powerful individuals that shaped the southern policy that led to secession (and still, in many ways, shapes political discussion today).
What events lead to the War of 1812?
1. France & Britain are at war. a. U.S. traded with both & profited greatly. b. Both Britain & France tried to cut off trade to the other. c. U.S. claims neutrality, but is ignored. d. U.S. ships are seized and American sailors are forced to serve in the British Navy (impressment). 2. U.S. passes the Embargo Act >>> which forbade exports and imports from all countries. Intended to hurt France & Britain but hurts U.S. the worst. 3. Congress replaces Embargo Act with Nonintercourse Act. >>>> U.S. could trade with all nations except Britain & France until they stopped seizing U.S. ships and sailors. a. In 1810 Napoleon (France) agreed to respect U.S. rights. 4. War Hawks in Congress – Henry Clay & John Calhoun urged U.S. to go to war with Britain. 5. Indians are furious at settlers moving onto lands. Tecumseh & his brother “The Prophet” take a stand & organize many Native American tribes into a Confederation to protect Indian lands & rights. a. Governor William Henry Harrison attacked Tecumseh tribe while Tecumseh is away (Battle of Tippecanoe). b. Tecumseh goes to Canada to speak with British and join Native Americans with the British if they go to war with U.S. 6. June 18, 1812 President Madison asks Congress to declare war on Britain due to pressure from Congress & angry Americans.
Who supported the War of 1812 and why? What were they called?
Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun were the most notable. They were known as the War Hawks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Hawk
Why did the war hawks want war against britain in 1812?
There were a few reasons. One was Britain's interference with American trade, and that they were conscripting thousands of American sailors into the Royal Navy. It is alleged that they were instigating the Indians to attack American Settlements. They wanted to finalize American independence from Britain. I listed two sources, but there's a lot more out there.
Following the War of 1812, Congress...?
A. rejected John Calhoun's call for federal funding to build roads and canals B. rejected the nationalist program advanced by Henry Clay C. enacted a protective tariff to aid certain American industries D. established the independant treasury system Only one choice please! This is for my multiple choice homework thing. Thanks!
What is the significance of the War Hawks of 1812?
They were the Americans who wanted to go to war against Great Britain and they actually argued for that as early as 1809. They managed to force President Madison to declare war in June of 1812, just after most of the threat to GB from Napoleon was over.As far as I can tell, there were two War Hawk camps in the US-Eastern or Maritime Hawks and Western Hawks.The Eastern Hawks were upset with the embargo on trade with France imposed by Great Britain and the impressing of American sailors into the British Navy.The Western Hawks were upset with Great Britain’s support of the Aboriginals in the “Indian” territories (Michigan and Ohio). GB was providing arms and ammunition to the Aboriginals.The War Hawks were not universally supported. Anti-war demonstrations occurred in New York City when war was declared and the New England States did not declare war at all. This meant the the US could not move federal troops through those states so they were never able to engage Eastern Lower Canada or the Maritime provinces in war.As a result, much of the American war effort was focused on the Western part of Upper Canada and the Western Hawks diverted war materiel intended to attack GB to their attacks on Aboriginals.