WI: A delayed American Civil War and a Douglas/Johnson Presidency

I made a post about this before, but it did not get much traction. Likely due to the title. So I want to post about this scenario again, with a few added details. I would also like to link to past threads I have found addressing the topic that I think add some interesting points

The Youtuber Mr. Beat created an AH scenario that I find interesting. Having Stephen Douglass win the Presidential election of 1860, but then have Lincoln run again and win in 1864. Leading to an ACW starting 4 years later than OTL. So I would like to ask others what they think the most likely outcomes of this POD would be. How might this alternate ACW differ from OTL, and what the butterflies would effect the rest of the world?

The international impact of a delayed ACW interests me a lot. It would most likely delay the Confederation of Canada. It would also likely prevent the French invasion of Mexico, since Nap III attempted to take over the country only due to the US being occupied in the ACW. How thus would lead to Benito Juarez handling the financial issues of his government though, I am not sure.

This TL's ACW would likely be different due to the number of states in this TL, and alternate migration patterns. In OTL there were movements to split California in two, with the southern part being named Colorado, and an attempt to split Texas in two, with the east being named Jacinto. Both movements were halted by the start of the ACW, so in this TL they may come to fruition. In such a case I think it may be likely that this alternate Colorado joins the CSA, along with Jacinto, but the remainder of TX may now be in question if it remains with the Union or not.

Alternate Wars with Native Americans are likely as well. The Second Battle of Fort Defiance lead to conflicts between the US army and Navajos from 1860 to 1864. Mainly ending due to the actions of Kit Carson after the defeat of the Confederates at Glorietta Pass. The Bascom Affair of 1861 lead to military conflict with Americans and Apaches, that immediately bled into the ACW. With the ACW being delayed, their may be a higher presence of US soldiers in New Mexico to fight Apaches and Navajos before the start of this alternate war. Leading to battles of a larger scale in that area than in OTL's ACW between Unions and Confederates. The Dakota Uprising of 1862 would likely not occur as in OTL, as it was mainly due to delays in payments to the Dakota people from the US Govt. due to the War, and local food providers refusing to sell supplies to Dakota people on credit. This would then likely impact future conflicts between the US and other tribes like the Lakota and Cheyanne. The events that lead to The Snake War may also be altered as well depending on the migration of Americans to the areas of Oregon, Nevada, California, and Idaho in this ATL. The blocking of the Homestead Act in Mr. Beat's ATL would of course be of benefit to Native Americans by preventing the influx of American settlers than came in OTL.

The actions of many African Americans would also likely be very different in this TL and lead to alternate scenarios. The most notable scenario I can think of at the time of writing this involves Martin Delany and Robert Campbell. Before the ACW they traveled to Abeokuta, in modern day Nigeria, to sign agreements with local leaders to allow African Americans to immigrate and settle in the area. They ended up abandoning this plan in part due to the advent of the ACW, as well as British actions around Lagos taking more control of the area (4). Perhaps with a delayed ACW Delany and Campbell may have worked harder at this plan. Leading to many escaped slaves during this alternate ACW to travel to Abeokuta and establishing a country like Liberia there.

Whether or not delaying the ACW would give the Confederates and advantage I am not sure. It may allow for more industrial bases to improve their capabilities in Southern States that surpass that of OTL. Such as the Tredegar Iron Works gaining a Bessemer converter for steel production, something CS agents tried to get threw the blockade in OTL. This scenario would of course allow more time for the production of development of weapons in the Northern States too of course. The New Haven's Arms Company would be allowed 4 more years to make a sell Henry Rifles, likely making them much more common during this alternate ACW.

An interesting scenario that might put the CSA in a better position regards the plans for a Transcontenental Railroad. Among the different routes suggested threw land survey, the southernmost option planed a railroad from Texas to California threw the New Mexico territory. This was considered the easiest route to build, and the one that politicians from Southern states advocated for against all others. It was not until the Civil War, and the removal of those opposing other routes, that the route of the first transcontinental railroad of OTL was settled upon. In TTL with a Southern President such as Johnson as POTUS, the southern plan for the railroad may go threw. So that by the start of this alternate CW There is much of the railroad already built threw Texas, giving Confederates from Texas a greater advantage in supplying an army sent to capture areas of New Mexico. Another section of the railroad may also be built from California into New Mexico as well, unless it is captured by confederates in TTL it would also allow a greater Union presence in New Mexico and larger scale battles in that area
 
I think there might be better executive leadership in the CSA, with Breckenridge having more of an impact in the Senate and perhaps being the 'obvious' choice for President even if Kentucky did not secede.

Also him and Lincoln know and like each other, which would make things interesting.
 
I’m skeptical that if Douglas wins in 1860, Lincoln would be the nominee in 1864. Lincoln was a dark horse at the 1860 RNC OTL, and 4 more years of a hated Democrat in office might lead to a more radical selection (on the slavery issue) in 1864–probably Chase, given Seward’s age and the potential for seeing tariffs as a losing issue
 

Deleted member 186022

I’m skeptical that if Douglas wins in 1860, Lincoln would be the nominee in 1864. Lincoln was a dark horse at the 1860 RNC OTL, and 4 more years of a hated Democrat in office might lead to a more radical selection (on the slavery issue) in 1864–probably Chase, given Seward’s age and the potential for seeing tariffs as a losing issue
Personally, I would be more interested in a two-term Breckenridge presidency.
 
I agree with Mr Beat that Douglass was the most likely candidate after Lincoln for POTUS. As for position of POTCS, I'll assume the CSA of TL still has one term presidencies
 
I’m skeptical that if Douglas wins in 1860, Lincoln would be the nominee in 1864. Lincoln was a dark horse at the 1860 RNC OTL, and 4 more years of a hated Democrat in office might lead to a more radical selection (on the slavery issue) in 1864–probably Chase, given Seward’s age and the potential for seeing tariffs as a losing issue
I don't know much about Chase. How do you think he'd be different

I think 4 more years might give Lincoln more time to evolve in his thoughts on slavery so that by 1864 he believes as he did in OTL that it must be ended. 4 years is plenty of time for people like Frederick Douglass and Martin Delaney to seek him out and change is mind
 
I don't know much about Chase. How do you think he'd be different

I think 4 more years might give Lincoln more time to evolve in his thoughts on slavery so that by 1864 he believes as he did in OTL that it must be ended. 4 years is plenty of time for people like Frederick Douglass and Martin Delaney to seek him out and change is mind
Chase was more radical on the slavery question but as an ex-Democrat wasn’t committed to protectionism as the former Whigs were.
 
I still don't see how Douglas can win in 1860. I can see the race going into the House, yes, but (1) Douglas specifically said he would not accept election by the House (like many Democrats he had unpleasant memories of the "corrupt bargain"of 1824); (2) he would probably not be one of the top three candidates anyway , (3) even if he were, there was only one state delgation (Illinois) controlled by Douglas Democrats, and (4) the Breckenridge Demcorats in the House are not going to vote for him; they would much prefer a deadlcok in which the Senate's choice for vice-president (the "doughface" Lane of Oregon, Bredkinridge's eunning mate) would become (acting) president.
 
I made a post about this before, but it did not get much traction. Likely due to the title. So I want to post about this scenario again, with a few added details. I would also like to link to past threads I have found addressing the topic that I think add some interesting points

The Youtuber Mr. Beat created an AH scenario that I find interesting. Having Stephen Douglass win the Presidential election of 1860, but then have Lincoln run again and win in 1864. Leading to an ACW starting 4 years later than OTL. So I would like to ask others what they think the most likely outcomes of this POD would be. How might this alternate ACW differ from OTL, and what the butterflies would effect the rest of the world?

The international impact of a delayed ACW interests me a lot. It would most likely delay the Confederation of Canada. It would also likely prevent the French invasion of Mexico, since Nap III attempted to take over the country only due to the US being occupied in the ACW. How thus would lead to Benito Juarez handling the financial issues of his government though, I am not sure.

This TL's ACW would likely be different due to the number of states in this TL, and alternate migration patterns. In OTL there were movements to split California in two, with the southern part being named Colorado, and an attempt to split Texas in two, with the east being named Jacinto. Both movements were halted by the start of the ACW, so in this TL they may come to fruition. In such a case I think it may be likely that this alternate Colorado joins the CSA, along with Jacinto, but the remainder of TX may now be in question if it remains with the Union or not.

Alternate Wars with Native Americans are likely as well. The Second Battle of Fort Defiance lead to conflicts between the US army and Navajos from 1860 to 1864. Mainly ending due to the actions of Kit Carson after the defeat of the Confederates at Glorietta Pass. The Bascom Affair of 1861 lead to military conflict with Americans and Apaches, that immediately bled into the ACW. With the ACW being delayed, their may be a higher presence of US soldiers in New Mexico to fight Apaches and Navajos before the start of this alternate war. Leading to battles of a larger scale in that area than in OTL's ACW between Unions and Confederates. The Dakota Uprising of 1862 would likely not occur as in OTL, as it was mainly due to delays in payments to the Dakota people from the US Govt. due to the War, and local food providers refusing to sell supplies to Dakota people on credit. This would then likely impact future conflicts between the US and other tribes like the Lakota and Cheyanne. The events that lead to The Snake War may also be altered as well depending on the migration of Americans to the areas of Oregon, Nevada, California, and Idaho in this ATL. The blocking of the Homestead Act in Mr. Beat's ATL would of course be of benefit to Native Americans by preventing the influx of American settlers than came in OTL.

The actions of many African Americans would also likely be very different in this TL and lead to alternate scenarios. The most notable scenario I can think of at the time of writing this involves Martin Delany and Robert Campbell. Before the ACW they traveled to Abeokuta, in modern day Nigeria, to sign agreements with local leaders to allow African Americans to immigrate and settle in the area. They ended up abandoning this plan in part due to the advent of the ACW, as well as British actions around Lagos taking more control of the area (4). Perhaps with a delayed ACW Delany and Campbell may have worked harder at this plan. Leading to many escaped slaves during this alternate ACW to travel to Abeokuta and establishing a country like Liberia there.

Whether or not delaying the ACW would give the Confederates and advantage I am not sure. It may allow for more industrial bases to improve their capabilities in Southern States that surpass that of OTL. Such as the Tredegar Iron Works gaining a Bessemer converter for steel production, something CS agents tried to get threw the blockade in OTL. This scenario would of course allow more time for the production of development of weapons in the Northern States too of course. The New Haven's Arms Company would be allowed 4 more years to make a sell Henry Rifles, likely making them much more common during this alternate ACW.

An interesting scenario that might put the CSA in a better position regards the plans for a Transcontenental Railroad. Among the different routes suggested threw land survey, the southernmost option planed a railroad from Texas to California threw the New Mexico territory. This was considered the easiest route to build, and the one that politicians from Southern states advocated for against all others. It was not until the Civil War, and the removal of those opposing other routes, that the route of the first transcontinental railroad of OTL was settled upon. In TTL with a Southern President such as Johnson as POTUS, the southern plan for the railroad may go threw. So that by the start of this alternate CW There is much of the railroad already built threw Texas, giving Confederates from Texas a greater advantage in supplying an army sent to capture areas of New Mexico. Another section of the railroad may also be built from California into New Mexico as well, unless it is captured by confederates in TTL it would also allow a greater Union presence in New Mexico and larger scale battles in that area
Stephen Douglas died of natural causes, in June 1861. Are you going to imagine him living longer? Maybe he could have gotten the south to accept the modified version of the Crittenden Compromise that Lincoln supported. Then the horrible war is avoided, but horrible slavery continues.
 
Stephen Douglas died of natural causes, in June 1861. Are you going to imagine him living longer? Maybe he could have gotten the south to accept the modified version of the Crittenden Compromise that Lincoln supported. Then the horrible war is avoided, but horrible slavery continues.
Please look at the link in my OP to Mr.Beat's youtube video in which he lays out his ATL that I want to expand upon. He imagines Douglas dying as he did in OTL and his VP Herschal Walker becoming POTUS

Edit: I meant Herschel Johnson 😅
 
Last edited:
The Democrats were pretty hated after 8 years of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan appeasing the Slave States. I doubt Douglas had any chance to win.
 
The Democrats were pretty hated after 8 years of Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan appeasing the Slave States. I doubt Douglas had any chance to win.
I can agree with that, but the focus of my thread is What If he did win as Mr. Beat has in his ATL and what are the consequences on a global scale
 
The more we delay the civil war the chance of repeaters on both sides being the norm rises. Imagine a war were both sides are using Napoleons tactics, but the infantry have weapons that is closer to ww1. The battles will be even bloodier.
 
I can agree with that, but the focus of my thread is What If he did win as Mr. Beat has in his ATL and what are the consequences on a global scale
1. No Civil War, so the usual Cotton export to the British Industry as before
2. Egypt doesn't benefit from the Cotton Export in the 1860-1865 period. This can be interesting. Egypt had to deal with financial problems in the 1870s.
3. Douglas may divert attention to Mexico if the French intervene or show signs to intervene. Napoleon III will probably back out and Mexico will avoid some of the Civil War. Juarez will get an early win. Maximilian is still alive. What does Napoleon III do? Focus on Belgium?

I don't really see 4 years of Democrat rule leading to a Confederate Colorado. Any more appeasing of Slave States will guarantee a Republican victory in 1864. If Lincoln manages to participate in 1864 and win, a lot of things will be different. The Union wins the war in shorter span of time, unless the PoD somehow turns Kentucky Confederate, then things get interesting.
Assuming the Union wins, it will be a quick win. Lincoln emancipates the Slaves earlier and avoids assassination of OTL and enforces more of the Reconstruction. Nothing of utopian type but maybe less problems dealt by African-Americans in OTL.

And if the CSA wins because of this? Hard to say. Can't expand into Mexico due to Northern guarantees for Mexico. Can't expand into Cuba as Spain is in a better position by the time the Confederates are ready to do a move, nor are the Cubans going to tolerate Confederate rule. Holding the Confederacy together? Likely. Slavery isn't economically viable but it will be too controversial to start a discussion for an abolition ("If we abolish slavery, why did we leave the Union in the first place?") . Texas and Kentucky may leave the Confederacy just because of this. Something the Confederates won't tolerate if it means rejoining the Union. The first 50 years (1865-1915) will be very unstable. It's basically apartheid South Africa with a white majority and slavery still being legal. With 40% of the population being slaves and a nearby hostile, potentially abolitionist led Union, slave rebellions are possible. Not the reason that could end the CSA, but one of the reasons.

The Confederacy needs a lot of luck to survive the first 50 years with this PoD.

Edit: Forgot to mention, Alaska may not be bought in 1867 if the Republicans win the election in 1864. The purchase is likely delayed unless someone buys it before the Americans do. Was there any non-American interest for Alaska?
 
Last edited:
Please look at the link in my OP to Mr.Beat's youtube video in which he lays out his ATL that I want to expand upon. He imagines Douglas dying as he did in OTL and his VP Herschal Walker becoming POTUS
I know you mean Herschel Johnson but it's funny anyway! :p
 
1. No Civil War, so the usual Cotton export to the British Industry as before
2. Egypt doesn't benefit from the Cotton Export in the 1860-1865 period. This can be interesting. Egypt had to deal with financial problems in the 1870s.
3. Douglas may divert attention to Mexico if the French intervene or show signs to intervene. Napoleon III will probably back out and Mexico will avoid some of the Civil War. Juarez will get an early win. Maximilian is still alive. What does Napoleon III do? Focus on Belgium?

I don't really see 4 years of Democrat rule leading to a Confederate Colorado. Any more appeasing of Slave States will guarantee a Republican victory in 1864. If Lincoln manages to participate in 1864 and win, a lot of things will be different. The Union wins the war in shorter span of time, unless the PoD somehow turns Kentucky Confederate, then things get interesting.
Assuming the Union wins, it will be a quick win. Lincoln emancipates the Slaves earlier and avoids assassination of OTL and enforces more of the Reconstruction. Nothing of utopian type but maybe less problems dealt by African-Americans in OTL.

And if the CSA wins because of this? Hard to say. Can't expand into Mexico due to Northern guarantees for Mexico. Can't expand into Cuba as Spain is in a better position by the time the Confederates are ready to do a move, nor are the Cubans going to tolerate Confederate rule. Holding the Confederacy together? Likely. Slavery isn't economically viable but it will be too controversial to start a discussion for an abolition ("If we abolish slavery, why did we leave the Union in the first place?") . Texas and Kentucky may leave the Confederacy just because of this. Something the Confederates won't tolerate if it means rejoining the Union. The first 50 years (1865-1915) will be very unstable. It's basically apartheid South Africa with a white majority and slavery still being legal. With 40% of the population being slaves and a nearby hostile, potentially abolitionist led Union, slave rebellions are possible. Not the reason that could end the CSA, but one of the reasons.

The Confederacy needs a lot of luck to survive the first 50 years with this PoD.
1. Makes me wonder how this alternate ACW may effect textile workers in the UK differently from OTL
2. Thank you for reminding me of Egypt, that is another interesting butterfly effect. Do you have any thoughts on how this may alter Egypt's military reforms? Or if it may still attempt a war with Ethiopia? If it does not then it may avoid being in dept to British banks as it was in OTL and avoid being colonized by the British. So maybe no Mahdist war
3. Juarez will still have to deal with European powers demanding he pay back the debts defaulted on due to the reform war. So I wonder how he still may deal with that, as well as the conservatives still against him

Why don't you see that? I understand the Pico Act was supported by pro slavery people, so during a secession is think such individuals would try to take over the territorial government.

I do agree that making the Colorado territory would be seen as appeasing slave states as it could be made into a slave state in the future. As well that doing so makes a Republican win in 1864 more likely

I also agree that delaying the war does put the union in a better logistical position. Even if there is an increase in industrial abilities in slave states, the northern states will still have exponentially more.

I hope it would lead to Lincoln pushing for the end of slavery earlier. The details of how that may occur though I'm not sure.

I'm not sure how Kentucky could be made to secede. Unless anyone else has ideas
 
Last edited:
Top