Btw, I'm now considering some generals for the Army of the Susquehanna. The options are Meade, Pope, Reynold, Hancock s and Burnside. They all have advantages and disadvantages. Meade is capable if not spectacular in my estimation, and I'd rather have someone different from OTL. Pope is... well, Pope. Burnside is in New Orleans, though I guess he could be called back to the East if absolutely necessary. Hancock is a National Unionist and I'd rather have an apolitical man, and besides, I think there would be some problems regarding seniority. Reynolds is the front runner, but I have had some trouble finding good sources on him, especially regarding his political opinions. I know he was a Democrat OTL, but it seems to me that he was in fact rather apolitical. My main concern is whether Reynolds would be willing to execute the policies of hard war to their fullest conclusion, meaning destruction of Southern resources, hanging partisans without trial, exiling populations that aid the rebels, the government's policies regarding slavery, etc. His opposition to political considerations within the Army worry me in special, since at this level they cannot be separated. Take into account that right now Confederates are terrorizing and murdering Unionists and Blacks, and Lee's Pennsylvania Campaign promises to bring some terror to the North. So, for the members who know more than me, any information regarding Reynolds is welcome.
yeah no soldiers' unions but defiantly former soldiers in unions. they would add level of origination to unions and maybe make them more acceptable to Americans.
That's more like it. The position of the Republican party regarding labor is rather complex. They are more of a middle class and rich industrialist party, and in the ante bellum and during Reconstruction they expressed rather exaggerated contempt for labor and were friends of industry. The Democrats, by contrast, were seen as the friends of the people (White people, that is). Though, apparently, many conservatives went as far as equating Benjamin Butler and Karl Marx, with "Butlerism" being something of populist anarchy to them, and many Republicans too expressed pro-labor positions. The fact that a more successful Reconstruction entails having a large population of largely impoverished rural voters as core members of the Party is bound to make the Republicans go left as well. I do think that, once the issues of Reconstruction start to go away, the Party is bound to split due to the labor question.
A potential war hero depending on how the war is handled, as well as perhaps a very successful state governor who has unquestionable personal integrity to boot? Seems like possible POTUS material to me.
Interesting idea.