A little what if and history of the election of 1860

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

BlueandGrayl

First Sergeant
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
1,593
Location
Corona, California
Somewhat of an interesting what if overlooked in Civil War Alternate History (CWAH). Honestly I still think there could be Southern/Confederate secession but coupled with Western secession it means it is a whole lot more difficult for the Union to win and possibly end up losing.
 

Joshism

Sergeant Major
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
2,333
Location
Jupiter, FL
Honestly I still think there could be Southern/Confederate secession but coupled with Western secession it means it is a whole lot more difficult for the Union to win and possibly end up losing.
The Union would be hardpressed to handle an additional rebellion out west.

However, I can't see the Pacific Coast trying to break away unless the Confederates succeeded in getting independence. Republicans supported the Transcontinental Railroad and Homestead Act. The Pacific Coast might feel distant and neglected, but they had no institution or lifestyle under a perceived threat and no history of simmering disunion like the South.

The Pacific Republic only forms after the Federal government shows weakness by folding to the Confederates or losing to them, and even then probably not immediately. It's a response to failure.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

BlueandGrayl

First Sergeant
Joined
May 27, 2018
Messages
1,593
Location
Corona, California
The Union would be hardpressed to handle an additional rebellion out west.

However, I can't see the Pacific Coast trying to break away unless the Confederates succeeded in getting independence. Republicans supported the Transcontinental Railroad and Homestead Act. The Pacific Coast might feel distant and neglected, but they had no institution or lifestyle under a perceived threat and no history of simmering disunion like the South.

The Pacific Republic only forms after the Federal government shows weakness by folding to the Confederates or losing to them, and even then probably not immediately. It's a response to failure.
Perhaps if things don't go well for the Union on the battlefield and given that the Western and Eastern states didn't always get along (see Jennifer L. Weber's Copperheads) it might increase secessionist sentiment but who knows.
 

steve59p

Sergeant
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
711
That sounds very wild but if they did flip New York state that could possibly have the political effect suggested.

While they would be very angry at something that Lane became President by such a route I'm not sure whether there would be an attempt at succession by the north. Wouldn't Lane be something of a weak President, having difficulty in getting policy through Congress? After all couldn't they simply wait for another 4 years while resentment built up against Lane and his ideas?

Also it says in the link that:

"And the Senate, under the procedure laid out in the 12th Amendment, would have to pick between Hannibal Hamlin, who was Lincoln’s running mate — and Joseph Lane, who was Breckenridge’s.

Everyone knew Hamlin would not win that match-up. Joseph Lane of Oregon would, by default, win the pony."

To me, as a Brit and hence not that familiar with the US politics at the time why would Hamlin lose such a vote?
 

John Winn

Captain
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,704
Location
State of Jefferson
That sounds very wild but if they did flip New York state that could possibly have the political effect suggested.

While they would be very angry at something that Lane became President by such a route I'm not sure whether there would be an attempt at succession by the north. Wouldn't Lane be something of a weak President, having difficulty in getting policy through Congress? After all couldn't they simply wait for another 4 years while resentment built up against Lane and his ideas?

Also it says in the link that:

"And the Senate, under the procedure laid out in the 12th Amendment, would have to pick between Hannibal Hamlin, who was Lincoln’s running mate — and Joseph Lane, who was Breckenridge’s.

Everyone knew Hamlin would not win that match-up. Joseph Lane of Oregon would, by default, win the pony."

To me, as a Brit and hence not that familiar with the US politics at the time why would Hamlin lose such a vote?
I, too, rather doubt there'd have been any northern or PNW secession but I could see riots and political ugliness if NY had been flipped. I don't know why the author said Lane would easily defeat Hamlin. On a national level neither was really all that well known and one reads almost nothing about Hamlin's vice presidency.

I hadn't heard of any scheme to win the election by stacking the electoral college vote so that's really the thing that moved me to post the link.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

John Winn

Captain
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,704
Location
State of Jefferson
Unable to resist modern politics?
Just an afterthought. Since we've got multiple threads about removals and renamings I didn't think it qualified as modern politics. U. of O. just renamed several buildings so it was on my mind. Mods can delete the sentence if they disagree.

I hadn't heard about any plot to push the election into the House and that was the real interest.
 
Joined
Mar 3, 2017
Messages
9,787
Location
Chicagoland
Just an afterthought. Since we've got multiple threads about removals and renamings I didn't think it qualified as modern politics. U. of O. just renamed several buildings so it was on my mind. Mods can delete the sentence if they disagree.

I hadn't heard about any plot to push the election into the House and that was the real interest.
Just indulging in a little ball-busting. :D
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top