Trying to figure out the differences between the 1860 presidential candidates

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Has we know 60% of the 1860 voters voted against Lincoln but could not unite under one candidate. Of course due to the electoral college Lincoln may of won anyway but ruling a divided country is difficult at best. In order to understand why there was a 4 man race I was thinking to try to imagine what the US would of looked like under each of the other 3 candidates to understand why the electorate was so divided.
Feel free to correct my assumptions.
1. John Bell would of tried to avoid a civil war at all costs ( in that he had something in common with Douglas and Lincoln) Bell however would of allowed some new states to be slave states but not all. Bell would of been for low tariffs and restricted immigration.
2. Douglas would have been similar to Bell but more open on immigration.
3. Breckendridge would of been gung ho on adding more slave states and maybe would tried to use military force on Spain to gain Cuba and Puerto Rico and Central American countries. After all president Bucanan did offer Spain millions of dollars for Cuba and was rejected the Spanish King saying he would rather see Cuba sink in the ocean then sell it to the US in hindsight a real bad move. How many plantations could of been set up in the dry west? No the future of American slavery lay in the wet tropics. Again feel free to critique.
Leftyhunter
 
Back
Top