@Masked Grizzly. I have posted your question of who would be the best president to annex that farthest south line in Mexico on this forum post because the topic seemed more accurate. This post asks about annexing all of Mexico and I do also address that. Here is that invaluable source again of the farthest line south:
http://dsl.richmond.edu/historicalatlas/94/a/?sidebar=text&legend=hidden&view=plate (I love them maps
)
Martin Van Buren – did not want the annexation of Texas in 1845.
Lewis Cass – “a leading spokesman for the Doctrine of Popular Sovereignty, which held that the people in each territory should decide whether to permit slavery”
Richard M. Johnson -Johnson was the Democratic nominee for vice-president on a ticket with Martin Van Buren in 1836. He would have been 65 in 1845, died in 1850.
James Buchanan – would later serve as president and be completely incompetent. If elected as president in 1844 he could fail in making a deal with Mexico despite Mexico’s collapse. Would not likely pick Nicholas Trist who was the real person who negotiated the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848.
John C. Calhoun – did not want war with Mexico
Levi Woodbury - thought slavery was wrong but that it was written in the constitution
The darkest of dark horse Presidential candidates: More blacker than black
Sam Houston who drew that farthest line south in is a really interesting character out of all of the above.
- Elected Governor of Tennessee from 1827-1829
- He strongly supported Jackson's presidential candidacies
- He was elected as the 1st and 3rd President of the Republic of Texas from 1836-38 and 1841-44
- He later served as a senator for Texas from 1846–1859 and Governor of Texas 1859–1861 (He is the only US politician to serve two different governorships)
Sam Houston obviously had a talent for politics, legislation and governing and the only way that line is going to be drawn is if it’s someone from Texas. All presidential candidates for the Democratic nomination were from the original 13 colonies and wanted less territory. Many Democratic Party members did not want to annex areas with Mexican populations in them. The minimum they wanted was Lower California and Sonora (Northern Mexico) and that was it. Houston represents a toned-down version of the Golden Circle. (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Circle_(proposed_country)) If Houston becomes president and annexes that line expect all of the proposed territories for the Golden Circle to be a real possibility. Houston will fill his cabinet with more hard-core expansionists than he is and with people who want to accomplish this, frankly insane policy.
This Golden Circle proposed state originates from “Knights of the Golden Circle”. The likes of John Wilkes Booth and Jesse Woodson James are some of its alleged members.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_the_Golden_Circle
Houston was an unsuccessful candidate for the presidential nomination of the
American Party in the 1856 presidential election and the
Constitutional Union Party in the 1860 presidential election.
His running of the 'American Party' and 'Constitutional Union Party' is really interesting and intriguing. The American party was an
"anti-Catholic, xenophobic, and hostile to immigration, starting originally as a secret society". Whereas the Constitutional Union Party
"wanted to avoid secession over the slavery issue and refused to join either the Republican Party or the Democratic Party". It sought to
"recognize no political principle other than the Constitution of the country, the Union of the states, and the Enforcement of the Laws".
This simply clarifies that he supported the American Party before he realised the actions that James K. Polk, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan caused. He then moved to a politically impartial paralysis of the slavery issue and that the country came first and not the slaves.
Why Houston did not run for President:
The issue is timing. Texas was admitted into the union on 29 December 1845 but the Democratic nomination took place between May 27–29, 1844, which leaves Houston as President of Texas. Although what is peculiar is that Houston was Governor of Tennessee from 1827-1829 which means he was allowed to run for governor despite being Texan or 'foreign' to the United States at that point.
It would have been bold and probably euphoric if he attends the Democratic nomination as the President of Texas. Or he could have resigned his post as President in which case he would have definitely been able to take part.
One thing is sure despite this niggle. He would have run for President of United States in 1844 if he was either very bold or freely available without a shadow of a doubt in my mind.