Is a Seward presidency after a CSA victory possible?

I recently had the idea of writing a TL which involves the CSA gaining independence and then has William H. Seward becoming president of the USA afterward with the plan of expanding the USA to make up for the land lost to the south by purchasing Alaska and annexing British Columbia.

What I'd like to hear from others is whether or not they believe that a member of Abe Lincoln cabinet would be likely elected on such a platform after loosing the ACW. Ideas?

280px-William_Seward,_Secretary_of_State,_bw_photo_portrait_circa_1860-1865.jpg
british-columbia-map.gif
 

Free Lancer

Banned

Of course, in fact that is what I think would happen if the CSA won the war, the most likely scenario being Lincoln is beaten in the 1864 president election, the democratic would make a brief comeback delusional with their success in the election they would most likely will establish relations and seek to better them with the CSA.

And when Reality slaps them in the face that this is not popular, they will lose the 1868 president election to a regrouped Republican Party, expansion rebuilding a sense of pride in the USA.
 
I think he would be to associated with the administration that lost the war, and his political future would be effectively dead.
 
Of course, in fact that is what I think would happen if the CSA won the war, the most likely scenario being Lincoln is beaten in the 1864 president election, the democratic would make a brief comeback delusional with their success in the election they would most likely will establish relations and seek to better them with the CSA.

And when Reality slaps them in the face that this is not popular, they will lose the 1868 president election to a regrouped Republican Party, expansion rebuilding a sense of pride in the USA.
Yes, but I doubt the 1868 nominee will be "Higher Law" Seward.
 

Free Lancer

Banned
Yes, but I doubt the 1868 nominee will be "Higher Law" Seward.


I know but the question was if it's possible.

Personally I think it would be either Seward or Chase, it coming down to who ever barks the biggest in foreign policy and expansion to replace the land lost.
 
The best way to have Seward elected is either have him beat Lincoln in 1860 (Which will result in a civil war even quicker than under Lincoln) or have him elected in 1864 or 1868 after Lincoln wins the ACW. To do this Lincoln can't die before hand and thus not having Seward linked with Andrew Johnson.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
I think Salmon Chase is a more likely candidate, but Seward is another major contender if he decides to seek the 1868 Republican nomination.

Assuming a Peace Democrat wins in 1864, their first term is likely to be very rough. The drying up of war contracts will cause an economic contraction and the sudden influx of returning war veterans and European immigrant, and probably lots of freed slaves escaping from the Confederacy, will flood the labor force and lead to high unemployment. This, in turn, will cause a good deal of unrest in the big cities, which were the main political power centers for the Democratic Party.

While it is true that the Lincoln administration will be vilified for failing to subdue the Confederacy, it is likely that 1865-1868 will cause the Northern public to experience "buyer's remorse" on a big scale. This could swing public opinion back in favor of the Republicans in some quarters and make a Republican comeback in 1868 possible.
 
Seward can quit right before things 'go south' for the Lincoln Administration and therefore not be associated with the true failures.

No way, no how the USA can British Columbia, ASB (and I don't use that often).
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Seward can quit right before things 'go south' for the Lincoln Administration and therefore not be associated with the true failures.

Unless you're suggesting a POD before 1862, there's no way Seward would ever abandon Lincoln. They were as good as brothers by that point.
 
Unless you're suggesting a POD before 1862, there's no way Seward would ever abandon Lincoln. They were as good as brothers by that point.

Yes, Seward quitting doesn't have to be his idea either. With Seward running around running his mouth off, he could be asked to leave if he actually screwed something up.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Yes, Seward quitting doesn't have to be his idea either. With Seward running around running his mouth off, he could be asked to leave if he actually screwed something up.

I think you may be confusing Seward with Chase. The Secretary of the Treasury did run his mouth off far too often. The Secretary of State, after a brief time of adjustment, came to realize that Lincoln was the right man for the Presidency and remained devoted to him until the end.
 
I think you may be confusing Seward with Chase. The Secretary of the Treasury did run his mouth off far too often. The Secretary of State, after a brief time of adjustment, came to realize that Lincoln was the right man for the Presidency and remained devoted to him until the end.

I agree Chase is more probable; I'm just suggesting that Seward is possible.

@ SPJ - annexing British Columbia means war with Britain, unless the British want to sell it (and I don't see that happening). The US might be able to win that war but it will not be a pleasant, little war.
 
I agree Chase is more probable; I'm just suggesting that Seward is possible.

@ SPJ - annexing British Columbia means war with Britain, unless the British want to sell it (and I don't see that happening). The US might be able to win that war but it will not be a pleasant, little war.
It doesn't have to mean. War according to the Wikipedia page on BC -

"In 1867, there were three options open: to continue as a British colony, to be annexed by the United States, or to join with the newly formed Dominion of Canada. Financially, becoming officially part of the United States made sense since British Colombia was economically essentially a satellite of San Francisco. The opening of the American transcontinental railroad in 1869 made it possible to travel by ship from Victoria to San Francisco, then by train to Ottawa or Washington in just 24 days. With the gold now gone, most of the American miners had left, and the economic future did not look promising unless B.C. could join the very rapidly growing, rich economies of the Pacific states. There was vocal sentiment in favor of annexation by the merchant community, but there was also a large element from Ontario and the Maritimes that wanted to join Canada, despite the vast distances involved.
When American Secretary of State William H. Seward negotiated the Alaska Purchase in 1867, it was part of his plan to incorporate the entire northwest Pacific Coast, chiefly for the long-term commercial advantages to the United States in terms of Pacific trade. Seward believed that the people in British Columbia wanted annexation and that Britain would accept this in exchange for the "Alabama claims". In the event, Seward dropped the idea of an exchange and accepted an arbitration plan that settled the Alabama claims for cash.Until the Alaska Purchase and the new Dominion status(which were almost simultaneous), the British had been indifferent to the fate of British Columbia. London now paid attention, and realized the value of B.C. as a base for its imperial trade opportunities in the Pacific and the need of the Royal Navy for a station in the region. Governor Anthony Musgrave proposed an attractive plan for joining Canada, with the Dominion paying off the B.C. debt and building a new Canadian transcontinental railway that would eliminate the reliance on the American transcontinental. Meanwhile, the United States was so focused on issues of Reconstruction, that few Americans picked up on Seward's grand dream to expand Manifest Destiny to the Pacific."

Perhaps if Seward was president the debates over annexation could go better for the USA. At least thats what I think.
 
Well, the problem is that Lincoln is likely to be vilified as an incompetent buffoon if the CSA is victorious. So Seward's membership in the Lincoln cabinet would probably be disqualifying in electoral terms.

Also, recall that the Republican Party was only eight years old in 1864; it is possible that the party itself would be discredited and effectively collapse. Now, the people backing the Republicans are very likely to form a new party with more or less the same principles and many of the same people. And that party would be very likely to win elections; but it wouldn't be the 'Republicans' per se, and they'd be unlikely to nominate Seward since he is electorally tarred by his association with Lincoln.
 
Well, the problem is that Lincoln is likely to be vilified as an incompetent buffoon if the CSA is victorious. So Seward's membership in the Lincoln cabinet would probably be disqualifying in electoral terms.

Also, recall that the Republican Party was only eight years old in 1864; it is possible that the party itself would be discredited and effectively collapse. Now, the people backing the Republicans are very likely to form a new party with more or less the same principles and many of the same people. And that party would be very likely to win elections; but it wouldn't be the 'Republicans' per se, and they'd be unlikely to nominate Seward since he is electorally tarred by his association with Lincoln.

Agreed, I can see Seward become the 16th president instead of Lincoln, I can see him become the 17th president if Lincoln survives 2 terms and follows Washington's precedent and steps down but I can't see him win if the CSA wins.
 
Any way we can get the 1886 Presidential Succession Act passed before 1865, thus making the Secretary of State (rather than the President of the Senate) next in line after the VP.

This Makes Seward the heir apparent at the time of Andrew Johnson's impeachment, instead of Ben Wade. With a less controversial successor, the impeachment might well have succeeded. It would only be a short presidency though.
 
Top