1864 election

Status
Not open for further replies.

Acbernsen

Private
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
I guess most would say that Lincoln would have lost the election without the "victories" in Atlanta and Mobile, but I'm wondering what people think about the world-historic consequences of there being no second term for Lincoln: no second inaugural (perhaps the greatest speech in the history of democracy), no assassination (however bad, the most galvanizing and immortalizing event of the century), and no likelihood that there was a peace that gave Davis what he was essentially looking for. Would this, as per the Gettysburg Address, have given fodder to the age-old argument that real democracy was a pipe dream? I only ask this as a history teacher that tries to put all of this in proper perspective. Davis, Lee et all, thought they were defending the principles of 1776. This is not a rhetorical question.
 
Last edited:
And yes, had Davis not replaced Johnston, Atlanta would have never fell, Lincoln loses re-election, and we'd be two different countries right now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And yes, had Davis not replaced Johnston, Atlanta would have never fell, Lincoln loses re-election, and we'd be two different countries right now.

Fascinating point. I'm not sure that Hood did such a bad job, but, yes, two separate countries was very much a possibility. I think this would have been disastrous to the cause that both sides were fighting for, but I see your point.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fascinating point. I'm not sure that Hood did such a bad job, but, yes, two separate countries was very much a possibility. I think this would have been disastrous to the cause that both sides were fighting for, but I see your point.
I think we overestimate the importance of the 1864 election. By the time McCellan assumes office it already Febuary 1865. McCellan did not state that he would allow the CSA independence quite the opposite. By Nov 1864 the Confederacy was in a bad way . Many slaves had fled desertion was rampant most of the CSA's ports where lost, Unionist guerrillas had liberated various areas of the South. By November of 1864 the Confederacy was a dead man walking.
Leftyhunter
 
I think we overestimate the importance of the 1864 election. By the time McCellan assumes office it already Febuary 1865. McCellan did not state that he would allow the CSA independence quite the opposite. By Nov 1864 the Confederacy was in a bad way . Many slaves had fled desertion was rampant most of the CSA's ports where lost, Unionist guerrillas had liberated various areas of the South. By November of 1864 the Confederacy was a dead man walking.
Leftyhunter
Not hardly. I will agree when General Lee lost the supply train it was definitely over.
 
We have had several threads on this. A President McClellan would have finished the war much as Lincoln had and is roughly the same time, given he's not going to take office until March.

The real difference would be the future of freed people and the continuance of slavery by other names. McClellan was conservative on this issue, as bad as Andrew Johnson. He faced a Republican dominated Congress. Would he have lost control of Reconstruction as Johnson did? Would a lame duck Lincoln not been able to steer the 13th Amendment before McClellan took office?
 
I think we overestimate the importance of the 1864 election. By the time McCellan assumes office it already Febuary 1865. McCellan did not state that he would allow the CSA independence quite the opposite. By Nov 1864 the Confederacy was in a bad way . Many slaves had fled desertion was rampant most of the CSA's ports where lost, Unionist guerrillas had liberated various areas of the South. By November of 1864 the Confederacy was a dead man walking.
Leftyhunter

To hypothesize Lincoln losing the election, we have to presume the war going much more favorably for the Confederacy, most notably not losing Atlanta and that campaign.

I expect we've all seen Lincoln's words from summer 1864, but pardon me if I repeat them:

"This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so co-operate with the President elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he cannot possibly save it afterward."

I'm curious as to what he meant by "co-operate with the President elect" who of course has no legal authority prior to his inauguration - any thoughts?

Ultimately the historical course of events made the question of losing the election not so much unimportant as impossible.
 
I'm not so sure that we would be two different countries if Lincoln had lost in 1864
to McClellan. The Union still held the advantage on the battlefield and sheer weight
of numbers was wearing out the ability of the South to wage war. Southern ports
were still blockaded even if Mobile was still in Confederate hands. These conditions
gave the North a strong negotiating platform to dictate peace on terms favorable
to them.

I think with the peace platform McClellan was running on, there would have been
a settlement that restored the Southern states to the Union. Slavery would have been
the sticking point but if a negotiated peace was made, Reconstruction probably wouldn't
have taken place and things in the South would be a lot more like it was before the war
once the damage was repaired and the wounds were healed.
 
I'm not so sure that we would be two different countries if Lincoln had lost in 1864
to McClellan. The Union still held the advantage on the battlefield and sheer weight
of numbers was wearing out the ability of the South to wage war. Southern ports
were still blockaded even if Mobile was still in Confederate hands. These conditions
gave the North a strong negotiating platform to dictate peace on terms favorable
to them.

I think with the peace platform McClellan was running on, there would have been
a settlement that restored the Southern states to the Union. Slavery would have been
the sticking point but if a negotiated peace was made, Reconstruction probably wouldn't
have taken place and things in the South would be a lot more like it was before the war
once the damage was repaired and the wounds were healed.

McClellan did not support abolition of slavery which would have made your theory possible but I don't think likely. Too much blood had been spilled for the South to embrace a McClellan election with an aw shucks attitude. Also, with McClellan as Commander in Chief I would think that he would continue his cautious ways and give the South the breathing room they needed to regroup and continue the fight.
 
And yes, had Davis not replaced Johnston, Atlanta would have never fell, Lincoln loses re-election, and we'd be two different countries right now.

Ill-informed nonsense.

If Davis didn't replace Johnston, Atlanta would have fallen sooner.

But Atlanta didn't secure the election for Lincoln. It helped to turn things around, but there were other victories involved such as the Shenandoah Valley and Mobile Bay that secured victory.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To hypothesize Lincoln losing the election, we have to presume the war going much more favorably for the Confederacy, most notably not losing Atlanta and that campaign.

I expect we've all seen Lincoln's words from summer 1864, but pardon me if I repeat them:

"This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so co-operate with the President elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he cannot possibly save it afterward."

I'm curious as to what he meant by "co-operate with the President elect" who of course has no legal authority prior to his inauguration - any thoughts?

Ultimately the historical course of events made the question of losing the election not so much unimportant as impossible.

The speculation I've seen is that he would work with McClellan to ramp up recruiting, using Mac's popularity to get more people to sign up.
 
To hypothesize Lincoln losing the election, we have to presume the war going much more favorably for the Confederacy, most notably not losing Atlanta and that campaign.

I expect we've all seen Lincoln's words from summer 1864, but pardon me if I repeat them:

"This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so co-operate with the President elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he cannot possibly save it afterward."

I'm curious as to what he meant by "co-operate with the President elect" who of course has no legal authority prior to his inauguration - any thoughts?

Ultimately the historical course of events made the question of losing the election not so much unimportant as impossible.
I would speculate that Lincoln meant to encourage McCellan to not accept allowing an independent Confederate nation.McCellan did state during the Democratic National Convention that he would not sacrifice the loss's of his comrades to allow an independent Confederate nation.
McCellan was no friend of African-Americans and his version of Reconstruction would probably be similar to President Johnson's.
Leftyhunter
 
I would speculate that Lincoln meant to encourage McCellan to not accept allowing an independent Confederate nation.McCellan did state during the Democratic National Convention that he would not sacrifice the loss's of his comrades to allow an independent Confederate nation.
McCellan was no friend of African-Americans and his version of Reconstruction would probably be similar to President Johnson's.
Leftyhunter

I never read anything that says that.
 
I never read anything that says that.
Well my friend you are in for a treat.
"Conscious of my own weakness, I can only seek fervently the guidance of the Ruler of the Universe, and relying on his all-powerful aid,do my best to restore Union and peace to a suffering people, and to establish and guard their liberties and rights." George B.McClellan
" In his acceptence speech for his nomination he wrote.,"The Union must be preserved at all costs".
"McCellan and the election of 1864; Election Amid the War 211 Dickerson College blogs
Leftyhunter
 
I never read anything that says that.
From McClellan's acceptance letter of the Democratic Party nomination..I could not look in the face of my gallent comrades of the army and navy who have survived so many bloody battles , and tell them that their labors, and the sacrifices of so many of our slain and wounded brethren , had been in vain, that we abandoned the Union for which we have so periilled our lives"
You are more then welcome to read his whole speech ; McClellan, 1864 Democratic Presidential Candididate-the Civil War
www.sonofthesouth.net mccellan
Please provide sourced information that McCellan was going to allow the Confederates to establish an independent nation.
Thank You so much in advance
Lefthunter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top