That said Garfield to me seems like the man who should be President because that Reforming platform I think was necessary. Plus his practice as a lawyer, and even the whole "writing Latin with the left hand and Greek with the right". He would definitely be one of the most smartest men to be President.
Garfield is definitely a front runner. His only flaw in my estimation is that he didn't like the prospect of further Federal intervention in the South. A more successful Reconstruction might make intervention unnecessary, but terrorism, resistance and racism will take a long time to die. Grant is better in that respect, though towards the very end of Reconstruction he also hesitated.
Someone upthread said Grant initially didn't really want to be president but unlike Sherman accepted the nomination. If a better candidate arises in this timeline then it could certainly go to that person. As I said, I am starting to warm to the idea of Garfield's directly after Lincoln. He is only three years younger than Chamberlain and I had begun to warm to him even before I read his Wikipedia article, he was elected to Congress during the war in 1862. Even more than Chamberlain he would need a mentor like Stanton just due to his age and could probably win the presidency without having to be vice president if the Republicans are strong enough and if he has made enough of a name for himself in the war. Chamberlain could then get his several terms as governor of Maine and run in 1876 and 1880.
Garfield would still need to distinguish himself in the war quite a bit but it looks very possible. Perhaps in this timeline he is involved in the capture of Chattanooga for instance.
I'd say that Garfield most likely fought at Dover and Corinth under Grant, then was transferred to Tennessee and saw action at Lexington and White Lily. So there is definitely potential for Garfield to be a war hero.
Just read the update. I wonder if Cleburne could be the "Stonewall Jackson of the West"
That's an interesting proposition. Cleburne is certainly talented, and Breckenridge has less qualms about bypassing hierarchies and Cleburne's peculiar views on slavery.
What about Schurz and the other 48ers? Hopefully the XIth Corps won't have the "Flying Dutchmen" rep they unjustly had IOTL (you can thank Howard for Chancellorsville, and Barlow for Gettysburg).
To be completely honest I have a bone to pick with Schurz. I just can't forgive him for being one of the architects of the Liberal Republican movement. I do feel for the 48ers, and plan to have the Germans take center stage in resistance to the Confederates in Missouri and Texas. Maybe I could make the "Dutch Corps" play a prominent part in the next campaign. Certainly, making heroes of the Union out of the Germans can help the Republicans to attract their votes, which would be very important in some areas.
I'm thinking that the Union answer to the Confederate shooting of Black Union POWs is the Union shooting Confederate POWs. And even beyond that..
Lincoln did threaten to do that OTL.