ACH WI Democrats run full on Copper head 64

Could the more pro Confederate element have won the Dem nomination?

If so would that have changed things?

Given military events in the fall of 64 I assume such a candidate would have lost by more.

Might Democrats have suffered long term damage, maybe allowing Populists of some other faction to replace them?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Assuming that military events are unchanged from OTL, a Copperhead candidate would have lost by a heftier margin than McClellan did.
 
Could the more pro Confederate element have won the Dem nomination?

If so would that have changed things?

Given military events in the fall of 64 I assume such a candidate would have lost by more.

Might Democrats have suffered long term damage, maybe allowing Populists of some other faction to replace them?


Licoln probably carries NJ and DE, leaving the Dems with only KY.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
A major problem is that perhaps the three most plausible candidates of the peace wing of the party--Thomas H. Seymour of Connecticut, Judge George W. Woodward of Pennsylvania, and Clement Vallandigham of Ohio--had been defeated for the governorships of their respective states in 1863.

Sure, but that was in the aftermath of Gettysburg, Vicksburg, and Chattanooga, when Union hopes of victory were high and the war was not expected to last much into 1864. By the summer of 1864, the situation had changed radically in favor of the Peace Democrats, what with the massive casualties of the Overland Campaign, fiascos like Cold Harbor, Kennesaw Mountain, and the Crater, Early's near capture of Washington, the burning of Chambersburg, and the seeming inability of Grant to capture Richmond or Sherman to capture Atlanta.

The Democratic National Convention took place at the end of August, just before the big sea change caused by Sherman's capture of Atlanta and the defeat of Early in the Valley. So the stock of the Peace Democrats was riding quite a bit higher at that point, though only for a moment.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
An actual Copperhead would not gain the vote of anyone who voted Lincoln OTL and would have turned off quite a few Democrats who voted for McClellan.

Kentucky would not have flipped for Lincoln, but Delaware probably would have and New Jersey seemed to only go for McClellan because of his favorite son status (they gave Lincoln 4 EVs back in 1860).

A better non-war POD for this election may bee if the soldier vote was not allowed for some reason or another. It was probably decisive in New York and Pennsylvania, and its added on effect of heavily Lincoln leaning soldiers getting family to vote Republican was a big deal.

A Copperhead Candidate may cause the Democrats to do even worse in the 1864 Congressional elections.
 
To achieve this you probably need the Confederacy to do better in 1863.

-Make Chickamauga into a total Union disaster

-Have a less convincing victory or even a draw at Gettysburg or equivalent

-Death of Grant, Meade, Thomas, or Sherman in the field. Maybe two of them?

-Confederates make (token) recapture of some point or points along Mississippi River

-Spanish recognition of Confederacy after the latter signs that Cuba 'will never be threatened' (though leaving room for sale if Spain so desires) in 1863

Maybe get at least two of the above to happen and you have a chance. Either way the Confederacy would have to be doing better than OTL late 1864 to assuredly get more than the original seven states, (most of) Virginia, and Texas. Arkansas and especially Tennessee (save for possibly Memphis) would be likely Union after that point, although agitators might try 'annexation by plebiscite' as some sort of political party of varying degrees of success for a few decades afterwards.
 
Top