Whigs win 1852

1852 was an electoral blowout for the Democrats, but it was not an assured victory for them by any means. It takes only a 3-point shift in every state to give the Whigs a victory in the 1852 Presidential Election:
Scott beats Pierce.png
Whigs: 156
Democrats:140

Now, there are other ways for the Whigs to win, which may give different geography to the election

Possible ways for the Whigs to do better :

Daniel Webster dies a couple months early, the North is united around Winfield Scott, he wins the nomination 51 rounds earlier, creating a less bitter and divided Whig Party.
The Democratic nominee isn't a war hero.
The Democrats have a harder time uniting.
Hale dies or otherwise doesn't run, Free Soil either doesn't field a candidate or fields someone radical, and northerners who voted Free Soil go to Scott.

Can President Winfield Scott hold his party together?

Scott beats Pierce.png
 
I would say your best chance would be to split the Democrats. Northern Democrats nominate Lewis Cass , Southern Democrats nominate Buchanan (or someone more radical like David Atchison). Then by the end of the ACW the Democratic Party could dissolve and have Whigs remain dominant.
 

Stolengood

Banned
You could have Pierce die of septicemia during the Battle of Churubusco, thus preemptively killing off both him and his presidential aspirations.
 
Well, begin at the beginning. Figure out who the Whig party chooses as Scott's Cabinet - because his administration is likely to be highly collegial. Scott is a soldier with few fixed opinions on non-military matters who just wants to be President; he's going to do anything the national convention wants in order to secure the nomination and election, and thereafter he's going to lean heavily on his Cabinet. So figure out who those men are. Even though the men like each other personally, Jefferson Davis isn't going to be Secretary of War, and thus isn't likely to have a high national profile in a few years...

It being a fairly quiet few years, the first thing is the vacant seat on the Supreme Court. Fillmore had proposed three candidates, all of whom the Senate, controlled by Southern Democrats, rejected. Part of their strategy no doubt included the idea that they could stall until the election and thereby get a nominee more to their liking. OTL, the election of Pierce let John Archibald Campbell get rubberstamped onto the court; that won't be happening here. Did Scott's coattails carry any more Whigs into the Senate? Do Taney and hench...er, friends relent and accept a moderate Whig of some description, knowing it will be at least four years before they can get a slave power Democrat nominated?

To address your core question - the Republican party is unlikely to get off the ground if the Whigs are seen as effectively opposing the slave power Democrats. While the best opportunities for doing so would come in a second term, how does the Scott administration position itself as effectively opposing the South-leaning legislature and Supreme Court during the 1853-1856 term?
 
Top