President David Rice Atchison 1853-1857

On January 6, 1853, the train carrying President Elect Franklin Pierce, his wife and son crashed. His son was tragically killed but Mr, and Mrs Pierce survived. What if the President Elect had been killed? The Vice President Elect William King had a terminal illness. OTL he died on April 18, 1853, after he had gone to Havana for his health. ITTL he probably would have stayed in Washington and probably would have died sooner. Senate President Pro Tempre David Rice Atchison would have become President. He was a Missouri slave owner and a stronger pro slavery advocate than even Pierce was. In 1854, he would have endorsed the Ostend Manifesto and pushed Spain to war. I see a narrow majority for the declaration of war composed of Southerners and pro expansion Westerners. The war is very unpopular in the North and makes the sectional divide worse. The US wins the war and takes Cuba and Puerto Rico. There would have been an expansion of the Navy and when the ACW breaks out on schedule the US Navy has more ships in dry dock. When they are staffed, there is a more effective blockade and more success along the Mississippi River. The war ends earlier. In 1864, the Peace Democrats have no credibility and Lincoln wins by 63% and carries Delaware and New Jersey. There are some obvious later butterflies. I see that the heavily Catholic and therefore heavily Democratic Cuba and Puerto Rico become states during the administration of Franklin Roosevelt. We would have had Senator Fidel Castro Republican of Cuba. The one US Presidential election this TL effects is 2000. The electoral votes of Cuba and Puerto Rico elect Al Gore. Since there is no Spanish American War in 1898, Theodore Roosevelt does not become a national hero. He is not elected Governor of New York in 1898 and is not McKinley's running mate in 1900. When McKinley is assassinated, someone else is President. How progressive is he?
 

Japhy

Banned
You really don't think this changes anything until 2000 even when you're saying that this removes TR from the stage?
 
Extra states, no TR, everything pretty much changes. Every US election will be different because of different issues, different demographics, etc. All of world history will be different. An almost uncountable number of butterflies would have to be killed for this to happen.
 
If King lived long enough might he have appointed someone else as his VP knowing he was going to die?

But if Atchison leads America to victory in an earlier Spanish American war he gets re-elected in'56. No matter how fanciful I do not see the North seceding.

The 1860 election would then probably feature whomever was Atchison's VP was for the Democrats and either Fremont or whomever was the recent war's biggest hero as the Republican candidate.
 
Really, So then both sides find a war hero

Maybe the Grey eyed man of destiny, William Walker, gets a chance on the US stage
 
If King lived long enough might he have appointed someone else as his VP knowing he was going to die?

But if Atchison leads America to victory in an earlier Spanish American war he gets re-elected in'56. No matter how fanciful I do not see the North seceding.

The 1860 election would then probably feature whomever was Atchison's VP was for the Democrats and either Fremont or whomever was the recent war's biggest hero as the Republican candidate.

Like Pierce OTL, Atchison alienated the North and does not win the nomination in 1856.
 

Japhy

Banned
Yes you are right. It obviously effects 1904 1908'and espically 1912.

What about, just for example, if Grant is recalled to service in the war with Spain and is killed in action? Or Robert E. Lee? or George Thomas? or Patrick Cleburne? What if the Democrats have some big damned war hero to run in 1860 who's able to co-opt Stephen Douglas and win the support of the South?
 
On January 6, 1853, the train carrying President Elect Franklin Pierce, his wife and son crashed. His son was tragically killed but Mr, and Mrs Pierce survived. What if the President Elect had been killed? The Vice President Elect William King had a terminal illness. OTL he died on April 18, 1853, after he had gone to Havana for his health. ITTL he probably would have stayed in Washington and probably would have died sooner. Senate President Pro Tempre David Rice Atchison would have become President. He was a Missouri slave owner and a stronger pro slavery advocate than even Pierce was. In 1854, he would have endorsed the Ostend Manifesto and pushed Spain to war. I see a narrow majority for the declaration of war composed of Southerners and pro expansion Westerners. The war is very unpopular in the North and makes the sectional divide worse. The US wins the war and takes Cuba and Puerto Rico. There would have been an expansion of the Navy and when the ACW breaks out on schedule the US Navy has more ships in dry dock. When they are staffed, there is a more effective blockade and more success along the Mississippi River. The war ends earlier. In 1864, the Peace Democrats have no credibility and Lincoln wins by 63% and carries Delaware and New Jersey. There are some obvious later butterflies. I see that the heavily Catholic and therefore heavily Democratic Cuba and Puerto Rico become states during the administration of Franklin Roosevelt. We would have had Senator Fidel Castro Republican of Cuba. The one US Presidential election this TL effects is 2000. The electoral votes of Cuba and Puerto Rico elect Al Gore. Since there is no Spanish American War in 1898, Theodore Roosevelt does not become a national hero. He is not elected Governor of New York in 1898 and is not McKinley's running mate in 1900. When McKinley is assassinated, someone else is President. How progressive is he?

With the butterfly nets aside(now, mind, convergence isn't always a bad or even less plausible idea, but it can hurt if taken too far), Atchison, unfortunately, probably would have been an *awful* President. You think even James Buchanan, who sold out to Southern interests to save his own ass, was bad? Atchison was much worse. Hell, even *one* term of Atchison might convince enough moderates to swing for a Republican, like John Fremont(Fremont, though born in Savannah, Ga., originally, had come to detest slavery later in his life), in 1856.....but if another guy just like Atchison wins that year, the stage might well be set for a more radical Republican campaign than OTL's 1860.....be it Lincoln or anyone else.

And here's one thing that could really complicate matters: if the Know-Nothings decide to bolt entirely for the pro-slavery camp, that could, potentially, make for something on the order of maybe several tens of thousands of Northerners who might just jump ship to the Confederacy once the Civil War breaks out, especially if it happens around OTL's timeframe of 1860-61.

I do at least agree that the Ostend war would probably indeed contribute to worsening sectional tensions, however.

And, finally, what happens to Puerto Rico is going to depend on the postbellum situation, with or without an Ostend conflict.
 
Top