CSA President Alexander Stephans

Somewhat worse. His heart was never in the Confederacy and how he would have reacted to the ideological dilemma of the CS war effort is an interesting question. He pretty much was a Starscream-type as Veep, and it would not to me be improbable that under him the CSA really would "die of a theory."
 
There is a record of him saying that the war was about slavery. Curious to see how he would approach foreign relations with Britain and France.
 
Somewhat worse. His heart was never in the Confederacy and how he would have reacted to the ideological dilemma of the CS war effort is an interesting question. He pretty much was a Starscream-type as Veep, and it would not to me be improbable that under him the CSA really would "die of a theory."


OTOH from what I have heard he was more likely to dump real losers like Bragg, Hood and Pope. How likely do you think it is for him to change in office? It is easier to ideological when you are on the sidelines. When it is YOU in the hotseat the tendency is to be more flexible.
 
There is a record of him saying that the war was about slavery. Curious to see how he would approach foreign relations with Britain and France.

Britain and France already knew it was about slavery. Neither Queen Elizibeth or Napoleon were complete and utter fools. I think he would try to backtrack a bit if he were the one actually in charge.
 
OTOH from what I have heard he was more likely to dump real losers like Bragg, Hood and Pope. How likely do you think it is for him to change in office? It is easier to ideological when you are on the sidelines. When it is YOU in the hotseat the tendency is to be more flexible.

That depends on who exactly he replaces them with. As far as how he'd change in office.....I'm not sure. There are leaders who would be stubborn enough to self-destruct rather than admit they're wrong.
 
How would Alexander Stephans have done as the president of the CSA? Would he have done better than Davis or worse?


Ironically, the most significant difference between Stephens and Davis would be that if Stephens was President rather than Davis in early 1861, there may have been no war at all. Stephens was a good friend of Abraham Lincoln, and would have been inclined to attempt to negotiate a re-entry of the South into the Union. It is unlikely he would have allowed the Fort Sumter incident (or another border conflict) to escalate as it did.
 
Ironically, the most significant difference between Stephens and Davis would be that if Stephens was President rather than Davis in early 1861, there may have been no war at all. Stephens was a good friend of Abraham Lincoln, and would have been inclined to attempt to negotiate a re-entry of the South into the Union. It is unlikely he would have allowed the Fort Sumter incident (or another border conflict) to escalate as it did.

Negotiate how? The North will neither let the South secede or allow slaves to be taken west. The South won't give up secession unless allowed to take slaves west. What is there to negotiate about? His friendship with Lincoln helped him not at all in 1864.
 
Negotiate how? The North will neither let the South secede or allow slaves to be taken west. The South won't give up secession unless allowed to take slaves west. What is there to negotiate about? His friendship with Lincoln helped him not at all in 1864.

Stephens may have been acceptable to the OTL radicals as Vice President in 1861. He would never have been acceptable as President. Therefore, for this to occur at all, some sort of alteration in the political landscape of the South has to have taken place, meaning we are looking at a South which is a good deal less radical than in OTL...a South which just may be willing to accept a compromise (the Corwin Amendment, or something like it) which would have been unacceptable to the OTL South.
 
Stephens may have been acceptable to the OTL radicals as Vice President in 1861. He would never have been acceptable as President. Therefore, for this to occur at all, some sort of alteration in the political landscape of the South has to have taken place, meaning we are looking at a South which is a good deal less radical than in OTL...a South which just may be willing to accept a compromise (the Corwin Amendment, or something like it) which would have been unacceptable to the OTL South.

That could work. The Corwin Amendment would have had a decent chance at passing as it didn't conflict with the Republican Party platform and was a Free Soiler party not an Abolishinist one. The Crittenden Compromise never had a chance though. It was merely a Southern wish list and would have been more fairly called the Crittenden Ultimatum. It gave the North absolutely nothing.
 
Stephens may have been acceptable to the OTL radicals as Vice President in 1861. He would never have been acceptable as President. Therefore, for this to occur at all, some sort of alteration in the political landscape of the South has to have taken place, meaning we are looking at a South which is a good deal less radical than in OTL...a South which just may be willing to accept a compromise .

President Stephens doesn't require a change of political landscape. One possibility is the sudden death of Davis. The other is getting the Presidency the way Davis did - by a combination of rival candidates shooting themselves in the foot and some clever politicking by his supporters.

Stephens probably would have made a better CSA President. He was vastly more diplomatic, which would have reduced the internal conflicts between CSA leaders. Stephens probably would have given the diplomats they sent to Europe something they could negotiate with. He's also less likely to try to pack the Cabinet with "yes men", which should give them a better Cabinet. Even if Stephens proved just as prone to favoritism in military appointments, the officers he favored probably would have been better than Bragg, Polk, Northop, and Hood.
 
He pretty much was a Starscream-type as Veep, and it would not to me be improbable that under him the CSA really would "die of a theory."

There's at least half-a-dozen men who would better fit the role of the Confederate Starscream. (Governor Brown of Georgia probably tops that list.)
 
Unless the butterfly is his death, I wonder what the relationship will be between Stephens and his top military commanders, which would likely include Jefferson Davis.

Can Davis serve effectively in a subordinate role, and on the battlefield?
 
Unless the butterfly is his death, I wonder what the relationship will be between Stephens and his top military commanders, which would likely include Jefferson Davis.

Can Davis serve effectively in a subordinate role, and on the battlefield?

Let's make him War Secretary. He did that already for the US government.
 
Let's make him War Secretary. He did that already for the US government.

If winning the Presidency isn't a fait accompli, I don't see him accepting any position in Richmond. Davis will want to serve on the battlefield.

But focusing more on Stephens instead of Davis, does he have the stature to utilize his authority on powerful men such as Lee, Davis, Beauregard and the two Johnstons?
 
There's at least half-a-dozen men who would better fit the role of the Confederate Starscream. (Governor Brown of Georgia probably tops that list.)

Great, now I have this odd image of Starscream, dressed on confederate grey, with an Imperial beard and mustache. This is ... strange.
 
Top