AHQ: Who is Lincoln's successor if not Grant?

[Geekhis Khan]

Assuming that Lincoln escapes assassination (say Booth gets ratted out by a co-conspirator) and assuming that for whatever reason Grant decides to stay out of politics (bad relapse?), who would Lincoln's most likely successor(s) be in the Republican party? Blaine? Colfax? Wade? Allison? Sherman? Another I'm not thinking of?

How would this alter Reconstruction?

How would the balance shift between the Liberal and Stalwart wings with a living Lincoln?

Do we get more Democratic presidents in the Gilded Age or fewer?

 

[Curtain Jerker]

Salmon Chase? The guy really really wanted the job - there's a reason he kept changing parties in order to run for President.

 

[KaiserWilhelm]

Honestly, if Lincoln lives, you could see a maintenance of the National Union Party with Johnson as the successor. Reconstruction under Lincoln is probably harsher than it was under Johnson OTL, but not nearly as harsh as Grant’s Congressional Reconstruction, though with some escalation later in the term. due to the predominance of the Radicals from 1867. Johnson would likely maintain Lincoln’s policies, but by 1872 the National Union Party could be squeezed (to the right by the Democrats and to the left by the Radical Republicans). My guess is that Blaine leads the Radical Republicans

 

[Strategos' Risk]

How is Seward or Stanton not on the list

 

[33k7]

General Sherman

 

[Geekhis Khan]

Salmon Chase? The guy really really wanted the job - there's a reason he kept changing parties in order to run for President.

Chase definitely wanted the job, and he did try to grab the Dem nomination even while serving as Chief Justice, but would either Party support him?

Honestly, if Lincoln lives, you could see a maintenance of the National Union Party with Johnson as the successor. Reconstruction under Lincoln is probably harsher than it was under Johnson OTL, but not nearly as harsh as Grant’s Congressional Reconstruction, though with some escalation later in the term. due to the predominance of the Radicals from 1867. Johnson would likely maintain Lincoln’s policies, but by 1872 the National Union Party could be squeezed (to the right by the Democrats and to the left by the Radical Republicans). My guess is that Blaine leads the Radical Republicans

Possibly. IIRC Seward hoped he'd claim the Dem nomination. I'd expect a lot of pushback from the Radicals. Much of course depends on how Lincoln's inevitable fight with the Radicals goes. While I personally reject the Lincoln Impeachment hypothesis (Lincoln was a much cannier politician than Johnson and would compromise where Johnson just obstructed) I suspect there will be fireworks that could sour the Republicans on Johnson. The '68 RNC will be interesting, no doubt.

How is Seward or Stanton not on the list

Stanton's a good possibility and definitely should be on the short list, great call. Seward was pretty old by this point (died 1872 iOTL), so assuming he ran and could be elected (IIRC he was controversial) he'd probably not live to see a second term.

EDIT: It looks like Stanton was in worse shape than Seward! He had a severe asthma issue that killed him in '69 iOTL.

General Sherman

He was pretty adamantly opposed to public office iOTL.

Proposed as a Republican candidate for the presidential election of 1884, Sherman declined as emphatically as possible, saying, "I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected."[261] Such a categorical rejection of a candidacy is now referred to as a "Shermanesque statement". - WIKI

 

[dcharles]

Before the assassination of Lincoln and the consequent ascent of the Radicals, the Blairs were a much bigger deal than they ended up being, and the liberal Republicans were more important than the radicals. I would put my money on Frank Blair or Horace Greeley.

 

[Lothal]

General Sherman

I think his brother John Sherman is way more naturally suited for the role, with extensive experience in diplomacy, the treasury and banking, the senate, etc not just warfare. Also William T. Sherman might not be the best choice for a country trying to heal the wounds of the civil war when he did the March to the Sea…

Going to through into the ring Benjamin Wade assuming that Lincoln has a change of heart and decides to throw the hammer down on the south with the Wade-Davis Bull instead of his proposed 10% oath to readmit plan. Horace Maynard or Thomas Nelson also couldve taken Andrew Johnson’s spot as a much more party-loyal Southern ally of Lincoln or his successor potentially.

 

[TheRockofChickamauga]

If I had to guess on a successor, my bet would be on Speaker of the House Schuyler Colfax. He would have six years of House leadership (and more than likely much legislative success) under his belt, and he was well-regarded from all corners of the party. Seward had made too many enemies during his tenure in the Lincoln administration to make him a serious contender for the nomination, with Chase in an only slightly better situation in that regard. Edwin Stanton, meanwhile, would likely be simply hoping to retire by the end of the Lincoln administration (if he had not left office already). Benjamin Wade was too iconoclastic and personally tempestuous to form the necessary coalition for the top job, not to mention his policy positions that might raise eyebrows. Andrew Johnson was always a partner of convenience for the National Union Party ticket, and similar to Wade his personality and policy would block any presidential ambitions with the Republicans. With Grant out of the picture, the five remaining primary Union heroes in the public mind (Sherman, Thomas, Farragut, Sheridan, and Meade) all expressed more or less apathy towards politics and politicians during their career, so they are unlikely to enter the contest. It is possible that a dark horse candidacy could emerge from the ranks of the War Governors or the lesser Union generals of the conflict, but in an 1868 without Grant, the Republican presidential nomination is essentially Colfax's to lose.

 

[KaiserWilhelm]

How is Seward or Stanton not on the list

Seward is too old by 1868, and both he and Stanton were dead by 1872.

 

[Geekhis Khan]

Before the assassination of Lincoln and the consequent ascent of the Radicals, the Blairs were a much bigger deal than they ended up being, and the liberal Republicans were more important than the radicals. I would put my money on Frank Blair or Horace Greeley.

Blair will definitely be a top dog in the Radical camp and Greely the Liberal camp. Assuming they don't tear the party apart I could see instead someone like Henry Wilson emerge at the RNC as a compromise candidate.

I think his brother John Sherman is way more naturally suited for the role, with extensive experience in diplomacy, the treasury and banking, the senate, etc not just warfare. Also William T. Sherman might not be the best choice for a country trying to heal the wounds of the civil war when he did the March to the Sea…

John Sherman seems a possibility for the future. He's young and is maybe the "Future of the Party" in some respects. Likely cabinet post to start.

Going to through into the ring Benjamin Wade assuming that Lincoln has a change of heart and decides to throw the hammer down on the south with the Wade-Davis Bull instead of his proposed 10% oath to readmit plan. Horace Maynard or Thomas Nelson also couldve taken Andrew Johnson’s spot as a much more party-loyal Southern ally of Lincoln or his successor potentially.

Wade could be a hard sell to the voters, but Maynard or even Parson Brownlow seems a good National Union choice. TAR Nelson would be a hard sell to the Radicals, I'd think.

...

I'm suddenly tempted to create a Wade-Wilson ticket. "Vote Wade-Wilson in '68 for Maximum Effort in 69!"

Suddenly the Grand Wizard of the Klan is found beheaded by a katana.

...

Ok, I'll stop now.

If I had to guess on a successor, my bet would be on Speaker of the House Schuyler Colfax. He would have six years of House leadership (and more than likely much legislative success) under his belt, and he was well-regarded from all corners of the party. Seward had made too many enemies during his tenure in the Lincoln administration to make him a serious contender for the nomination, with Chase in an only slightly better situation in that regard. Edwin Stanton, meanwhile, would likely be simply hoping to retire by the end of the Lincoln administration (if he had not left office already). Benjamin Wade was too iconoclastic and personally tempestuous to form the necessary coalition for the top job, not to mention his policy positions that might raise eyebrows. Andrew Johnson was always a partner of convenience for the National Union Party ticket, and similar to Wade his personality and policy would block any presidential ambitions with the Republicans. With Grant out of the picture, the five remaining primary Union heroes in the public mind (Sherman, Thomas, Farragut, Sheridan, and Meade) all expressed more or less apathy towards politics and politicians during their career, so they are unlikely to enter the contest. It is possible that a dark horse candidacy could emerge from the ranks of the War Governors or the lesser Union generals of the conflict, but in an 1868 without Grant, the Republican presidential nomination is essentially Colfax's to lose.

Colfax is definitely a top contender. He's young, but ambitious and as you note, one hell of a resume, and can play the party game. Though he comes across as nominally Stalwart, his links to the Moderates/Liberals may cost him with the Blaine Faction, which could lead to a compromise candidate if he keeps splitting the vote with Blaine, or perhaps he takes Wilson or Blaine or Wade as VP in compromise.

But yeah, I'm increasingly leaning Colfax here.

 

[Valentinian]

I would say John Logan has a chance. A former congressman from Lincoln's Illinois and with a very good war record. He was politically ambitious. He was also a big spokesman for the GAR, receiving their powerful backing. He was so important at the time that him, Lincoln, and Grant are the three people named in Illinois' state song.

 

[The Angry Observer]

Nobody has said this yet, but I"m going to go with Roscoe Conkling. He was young and very charismatic, with a talent for machine politics. He was a protege of Lincoln while also being a Radical Republican. At the time, his name was not synonymous with Gilded Age corruption. If Lincoln lives, I think Conkling cinches the 1868 RNC.

I also doubt Grant enters politics if Andrew Johnson is never President. People forget just to what extreme lengths Johnson had to go before Grant even considered a Presidential run against him. He literally had to semi-coerce Grant into committing a crime that could've landed him in prison for five years before Grant turned on the President. The other thing I really doubt is the Lincoln impeachment hypothesis. Lincoln's main clash with the Radicals was the fact that they kept making moves that could've made a tenuous position in the border states (keep in mind, Washington D.C. is sandwiched between a border state and the Confederacy) outright catastrophic with early moves toward abolition. Later on, it was over Wade-Davis and the Radicals' plans to disenfranchise the white south, as well as undermine the Union's reunification.

I don't see why Lincoln would give the Radicals grief on issues like civil rights. Hell, I'd bet he would actively scheme and arm-twist to pass the 14th and 15th Amendments, nor do I imagine him being particularly lenient towards violent Redeemers. Lincoln's last public speech (the one that caused John Wilkes Booth to vow "now I'll put him through!") was him defending his conduct in re-admitting Louisiana without a black suffrage clause, not because he was opposed to black suffrage, but because working to attain it within the present system made more sense to him.

Also, Lincoln was just clever. Andrew Johnson was a famously inept and obstinate President who needlessly wounded his own position because of his spiteful personality. Lincoln can certainly connive to avoid impeachment if it comes to that. But why would it? He won the war, liberated the slaves, and is probably working towards black suffrage. In the euphoria following triumph, I don't see the Radicals making an almost certainly fruitless move to impeach him. Who would they impeach him for? Vice President Johnson? Would they impeach him too? If it was tenuous that they could get Johnson ousted in favor of Wade, how on earth could they hope to get Lincoln ousted in favor of Wade?

 

[NedStark]

Nobody has said this yet, but I"m going to go with Roscoe Conkling. He was young and very charismatic, with a talent for machine politics. He was a protege of Lincoln while also being a Radical Republican. At the time, his name was not synonymous with Gilded Age corruption. If Lincoln lives, I think Conkling cinches the 1868 RNC.

There were more bigger names in front of him in 1868, namely Colfax, Wilson or Greeley, not to mention other rising stars like Garfield and John Sherman.

Plus, Lincoln surviving means than the Liberal/Moderate wing would still hold the majority. It took Andrew Johnson's repeated obstructions to enable the Radicals to gain prominence.

Blair will definitely be a top dog in the Radical camp and Greely the Liberal camp. Assuming they don't tear the party apart I could see instead someone like Henry Wilson emerge at the RNC as a compromise candidate

Last time I checked, Blair was a firm Moderate/National Union-type Republican. Greeley could also have a shot, since with a surviving Lincoln, the Liberals/Moderates most likely would have remained prominent.

 

[jpj1421]

Given how linked Lincoln and Grant were politically by the end, I think that he'd be working on Grant to get him to accept the Republican nomination in 1868 absent of Johnson pissing everyone off. Setting that aside, however, I think the Vice Presidential nomination in 1868 is instructive in this as consists of a number of figures who would likely have contested the nomination absent of Grant. Given that the 1866 midterms would likely be good for Democrats in this TL, one would expect the radical case wouldn't be terribly strong so Chase and Wade wouldn't be as strong as they seemed to be if Grant wasn't available. This bolsters the case for the likes of Senator Fenton or Speaker Colfax. Though, I do feel like if Democrats are really looking ascendant Republicans would be doing everything they can to get Grant to take the job.

As to Reconstruction, I think no Johnson leads to a slower "Redemption" movement as Lincoln appoints Governors more sympathetic to the Freedman which balances out a Congress with the votes only for a Moderate Reconstruction. Eventually 'Redemption' will take most of the South, but maybe it can be delayed that some states remain Reconstructed. If, say, Mississippi; South Carolina; and Louisiana remain Reconstructed that's enough Electoral Votes to keep Democrats out of the White House until 1892, if everything else remains the same nationally. You would then likely see the migration to Kansas seen IOTL as the Reconstruction governments collapsed be to the remaining Reconstructed states to fortify numbers there.

I've been reading Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution and taking notes as I think out such a TL.

 

[The Angry Observer]

There were more bigger names in front of him in 1868, namely Colfax, Wilson or Greeley, not to mention other rising stars like Garfield and John Sherman.

Plus, Lincoln surviving means than the Liberal/Moderate wing would still hold the majority. It took Andrew Johnson's repeated obstructions to enable the Radicals to gain prominence.

The thing is, Lincoln still commands this party. I had a big thing on how he would make the Radicals’ his sock puppets rather than the other way around, and the big point there was that whoever won the 1868 RNC would probably be a Radical who was an ally of Lincoln.

Granted, Colfax completely fits that bill too and makes a lot more sense.

I’ve got another call for a Lincoln lives and no Grant TL: the Democrats ultimately go extinct. The Liberal Republicans end up replacing them as the south isn’t disenfranchised enough for the Democrats to retake it completely, therefore denying them leverage in 1876 and denying them the EVs necessary to win for decades.

 

[PuffyClouds]

How many moonbats are needed for it to be Robert E Lee?

Seriously though, Philip Sheridan could become so indignant about Andrew Johnson that he runs to be his replacement.

 

[Geekhis Khan]

I’ve got another call for a Lincoln lives and no Grant TL: the Democrats ultimately go extinct. The Liberal Republicans end up replacing them as the south isn’t disenfranchised enough for the Democrats to retake it completely, therefore denying them leverage in 1876 and denying them the EVs necessary to win for decades.

I'd be curious to see it. It's a time period I'm only just starting to delve into in any depth.

How many moonbats are needed for it to be Robert E Lee?

Forget Moonbats. Probably would need a necromancer by the time he earned the right to run.

Longstreet, maybe.

Seriously though, Philip Sheridan could become so indignant about Andrew Johnson that he runs to be his replacement.

Could work.

 

[The Angry Observer]

I'd be curious to see it. It's a time period I'm only just starting to delve into in any depth.

The other thing about Republicans being solidly in charge is that we get no Grover Cleveland. Instead, James G. Blaine wins, a notorious Anglophobe who supported naval buildup. If ever there was a recipe for America being a Central Power, it’s this.

I mentioned Conkling being President, and the interesting thing there is that if he’s aggressively corrupt enough and can’t blunt it with the personal popularity someone like Grant had, he could lose 1872 to Liberal Republican Horace Greeley— who died days after the election concluded. This would basically be the death knell for the Democrats, and put Greeley running mate Benjamin Brown Gaetz on the path to Tylerville.

 

[GuildedAgeNostalgia]

Benjamin Butler - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

War hero, successful businessman, career politician, and radical Republican Major General Benjamin Butler.

Although modern historians look on him poorly, he had a really good reputation in the North at the time.