They basically TRIED this IOTL, and it totally fell on its ass.
Really? I've never heard of it. Do you mean the wartime occupation? Please cite; this matches nothing I've read.
The most that the USA is going to annex is some of the Northeast, like the cotton/ranching belts. Maybe they can get a garrison in Veracruz if they're really tough.
Well if they go and take that land, they're sure to keep it. It'll fill up with ambitious cotton farmers in no-time. I agree with that much, at any rate.
Durango and Zacatecas is too much, to say nothing of Sinola.
Why?
I mean, what almost happened wouldn't include any of those in their entirety. Only about half of the first and last were above the line, and a negligible section of Zacatecas. But why would you argue against the possibility of holding them?
Incidentally, I see I wrote Coahuila where I meant Sinaloa, a couple posts back. To edit!
Yucatan and Tabasco: no way Jose.
Oh, I could manage Yucatan fairly easily. If the US had accepted their request for aid in the Caste War instead of Mexico, for example. But you're right, that's another timeline entirely. It's not a reasonable outcome of OTL's war, and certainly wasn't one of the instructions Polk sent. No one was terribly interested at the time.
Sonora and Chihuahua aren't going anywhere, and the US was never truly interested in Baja; it had all the good parts of California.
Why? Your authoritative sentiments are only as valid as your justification for them. I assume you have some knowledge to back this up, but if you're not going to share, it's not really a contribution.