Retrospective US Presidential Election: 1860

Vote in the 1860 Retrospective US Presidential Election!


  • Total voters
    131
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why? Douglas was at the very least a true American, from the beginning to the end.

Popular sovereignty is unconstitutional and a failure; Douglas, as its biggest supporter, would do his best to institute it while in office. Bell would have compromised between the sides and done his utter best to avoid war. And being a "true American" in that sense, has nothing to do with geography. It deals with keeping with the founding beliefs of the U.S. which Bell kept, Breckinridge kept, and arguably Douglas kept. Describing a "true American" should never be used in a purely regional tone.
 
Popular sovereignty is unconstitutional and a failure; Douglas, as its biggest supporter, would do his best to institute it while in office. Bell would have compromised between the sides and done his utter best to avoid war. And being a "true American" in that sense, has nothing to do with geography. It deals with keeping with the founding beliefs of the U.S. which Bell kept, Breckinridge kept, and arguably Douglas kept. Describing a "true American" should never be used in a purely regional tone.

Im not using it in a regional tone but a national tone. There were plenty of true Americans from all over the US. Winfield Scott and George Thomas come straight to mind. And there were villains from the North.
 
And being a "true American" in that sense, has nothing to do with geography. It deals with keeping with the founding beliefs of the U.S. which Bell kept, Breckinridge kept, and arguably Douglas kept. Describing a "true American" should never be used in a purely regional tone.
Yes, it does depend on the founding beliefs - but we differ on what the founding beliefs are. I say America was founded on inalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Lincoln held to that; Douglas sometimes came close (as when he fought against Leecompton), but Breckinridge and Bell were far away.
 
And popular soveriegnty would have worked if enforced by federal troops. Kansas and every other territory would have gone free with exception of Oklahoma were slavery was already entrenched.

If Douglas had been president in 1857, he would have done something about Bleeding Kansas, and recognized the fre state of Kansas. And he'll get it ok'd by the south with war with Spain over Cuba. But thats besides the fact.
 
Yes, it does depend on the founding beliefs - but we differ on what the founding beliefs are. I say America was founded on inalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I completely agree with that. But what I'm talking about right now is also states rights; the legal sovereignty of each state as endowed in the constitution. If they joined the union willingly, they can leave willingly. Bell would have done as much as possible to prevent secession, but if it did happen, he would not have forced the states to rejoin at gunpoint.
 
I completely agree with that. But what I'm talking about right now is also states rights; the legal sovereignty of each state as endowed in the constitution. If they joined the union willingly, they can leave willingly. Bell would have done as much as possible to prevent secession, but if it did happen, he would not have forced the states to rejoin at gunpoint.
If you're talking about that, then I agree that Breckinridge and Bell (though not really Douglas - look upthread; he offered his services to Lincoln after secession) kept those principles. I think it's important - but it pales before the principles of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. So, I vote for Lincoln.
 
Interesting to see the GOP get off to a such a roaring start in the pre-1900 series while it dies a slow but steady death in the post-1900 series. Just goes to show how much politics can re-align over time.
 
Interesting to see the GOP get off to a such a roaring start in the pre-1900 series while it dies a slow but steady death in the post-1900 series. Just goes to show how much politics can re-align over time.

One of my favorite parts of every history class has been when someone inevitably asks why the Republican party used to be the good and now it's the bad one. :D:rolleyes:
 
Just for fun:

genusmap.php


Lincoln: 183
Breckinridge: 76
Bell: 23
Douglas: 21

I went on the assumption that al of the states that would secede would be picked by legislature, and that Bell being from Tennessee would be enough to tip the balance. Deleawre and Maryland were close fought things for Bell and so I tipped them to him. And I gave Kentucky to Douglas because I felt bad for him.
 
Just for fun:

Lincoln: 183
Breckinridge: 76
Bell: 23
Douglas: 21

I went on the assumption that al of the states that would secede would be picked by legislature, and that Bell being from Tennessee would be enough to tip the balance. Deleawre and Maryland were close fought things for Bell and so I tipped them to him. And I gave Kentucky to Douglas because I felt bad for him.

I don't think the EV map is going to be much different at all from the OTL map. Lincoln won all the free states in OTL with a lower % of the national popular vote. So even with his higher % here, he can't really do any better, so he'll get the same states. And I figure the South will be the same as in OTL as well, although perhaps I could give Bell MD and DE, since he's doing better than Breckinridge here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top