Greenville
Banned
What if Lincoln does manage to live through his second presidential term into 1869?
Might he seek a third term, or will he stand staunchly by the "tradition"?
There's also a tendency for assassinated controversial presidents to quickly become lionized. OTL Lincoln was incredibly hated, and I've seen some arguments that a lot of the -R vote in the 1864 election - especially among soldiers - was driven not by a comparison of Lincoln v McClellan but by the general understanding that a President McClellan could be assassinated and put his deeply unpopular DNC-mandated VP in the White House!He won't be remembered as the great man we know because the fights he'll have to do in the postwar era and the mistakes he will do (as he is wont to do) will diminish his fame
I wouldn't call the election close- 55% to 45%; 400,000 vote difference out of a total of 4 million votes cast (with a roughly 73% turnout). The electoral vote was a HUGE landslide- McClellan got 3 states with a total of 21 electoral votes. Lincoln had a mandate.There's also a tendency for assassinated controversial presidents to quickly become lionized. OTL Lincoln was incredibly hated, and I've seen some arguments that a lot of the -R vote in the 1864 election - especially among soldiers - was driven not by a comparison of Lincoln v McClellan but by the general understanding that a President McClellan could be assassinated and put his deeply unpopular DNC-mandated VP in the White House!
(Even with McClellan's campaign a self-contradiction, as he repudiated the central 'Peace' plank of his own party's platform, the election was really quite close.)
When he became a martyr that changed all but overnight.
Well, that's kind of my point. 55% is about what he got in the North as an unknown in 1860, and his opponents were badly divided with their official platform mid-war being "let's give up".I wouldn't call the election close- 55% to 45%; 400,000 vote difference out of a total of 4 million votes cast (with a roughly 73% turnout).
That's largely due to the peculiarities of Republican support, though, in that several states were won by very small margins.The electoral vote was a HUGE landslide- McClellan got 3 states with a total of 21 electoral votes. Lincoln had a mandate.
I'm sorry, but I don't see the slim margins except from NY, CT, and PA; and even then he wins handily even if he loses those states.Well, that's kind of my point. 55% is about what he got in the North as an unknown in 1860, and his opponents were badly divided with their official platform mid-war being "let's give up".
That's largely due to the peculiarities of Republican support, though, in that several states were won by very small margins.
Make no mistake, I'm not arguing Lincoln didn't have a mandate - I'm arguing that the small scale of his victory in popular vote terms even during a period of national victory and against a "Peace" faction is evidence that people just weren't all that hot on the man personally. (The Republican campaign was to a large extent a "fear" campaign, aided by at least a few dodgy dealings.)
This is supplemented by other evidence from the time, from cartoons to the general sense of Republican party insiders, that it was pretty much "Lincoln as least bad option".
I know, but the "landslide" argument electorally is not based on strong margins in those states but on rather slim ones. 147/86 isn't nearly as much of a "landslide".I'm sorry, but I don't see the slim margins except from NY, CT, and PA; and even then he wins handily even if he loses those states.
Of course he earned it through the spoils system. The concept of primaries wouldn't be for another 100 years.I know, but the "landslide" argument electorally is not based on strong margins in those states but on rather slim ones. 147/86 isn't nearly as much of a "landslide".
Again, I'm not somehow trying to say that Lincoln didn't "really" win the election - he manifestly did. I'm arguing that this was despite the personal unpopularity of Lincoln rather than because of his personal popularity, and indeed the Wade-Davis manifesto was basically an attempt to kill his political career from within his own party.
(Of course, it didn't help that he was accused - rightly or not - of earning the nomination via the "spoils" system.)
No, I'm not sure you understand what I mean. I mean he was viewed at the time as having done it improperly - that is, by packing the convention with supporters who were not representative of the state parties. (At the time the state parties chose who their delegates would support - his use of spoils was seen as an undemocratic end run around this process, which played into the meme he was a bit of a tyrant.)Of course he earned it through the spoils system. The concept of primaries wouldn't be for another 100 years.
If the Civil War was still going on, I'd be inclined to think so, but the immediate crisis has passed. The last thing he ought to do if he wants to discredit Southern accusations of him being a tyrant is to try to put himself 'above' Washington of all people during peacetime.
I don't agree with the idea that Lincoln would've been impeached over suspending the Constitution and closing newspapers or a similar fate to Johnson.
The Constitutional amendments are still proposed by Radical Republicans in Congress which Lincoln approves. The fifteenth amendments has better wording.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 probably still is struck down by the Supreme Court.
Reconstruction foes the same. Grant succeeds Lincoln as president in 1869.
He doesn't fall out with Congress half as badly as Johnson did. He almost certainly signs the Freedmans Bureau and Civil Rights Acts, and probably supports a 14th Amendment of some kind - though he's likely to oppose Section 3 as an infringement on his pardoning power. He will also favour the enfranchisement of at least some Blacks, in particular those who have served in the Union Army. Even Johnson suggested a limited enfranchisement, but was too "States Rights" minded to insist. Lincoln would probably make it an order.
Longer term, I'm afraid, probably not a lot changes. Sooner or later the ex-Rebs will control the South, and probably won't be much nicer to Blacks than OTL; and, as OTL, most northerners won't care enough to do much about it. But there may be less bloodshed along the way.
Well this is depressing. I remember always believing that Lincoln would have enforced Reconstruction and prevent the CSA from being popular today.
Oh well. Is there any way to actually have made Reconstruction work in a plausible way?
I know, but the "landslide" argument electorally is not based on strong margins in those states but on rather slim ones. 147/86 isn't nearly as much of a "landslide".
Again, I'm not somehow trying to say that Lincoln didn't "really" win the election - he manifestly did. I'm arguing that this was despite the personal unpopularity of Lincoln rather than because of his personal popularity, and indeed the Wade-Davis manifesto was basically an attempt to kill his political career from within his own party.
(Of course, it didn't help that he was accused - rightly or not - of earning the nomination via the "spoils" system.)
I think some of it will depend on whether he survives an assassination attempt, or whether there is simply no attempt made.