WI: Bell-Davis Coalition Ticket Wins, USA, 1860

I sometimes wonder about this one. The 1860 election was the pivotal trigger of the Civil War. The election of Lincoln resulted in the Southern Secession, and a story we all know too well follows thereafter.

History also makes much of the whole "Stephen Douglas recognized that Lincoln was going to win the Election, so he went south to try to keep the union together." What instead if he decides to sacrifice his own presidential bid to John Bell, the Southern Unionist Candidate, and they form a coalition ticket?

This means that John Breckinridge and Abraham Lincoln emerge as party leaders for regional parties, while Bell-Douglas essentially have a mandate to try to avoid the civil war.

But I doubt that the compromise government can really solve the slavery question, and that the moderates in the south and the north would be polarized--More John Brown like terrorism? A slave revolt? Supreme Court Nominations causing public outcry?

I'm curious--can Bell-Douglas even last until 1864, or would the United States break down the middle in the midst of their term? Would Bell/Douglas negotiate a deal on secession? Or would the South force them into a war?
 
Well, you need to change a few events a few years back to give Bell (or any Southron) a prayer of winning in 1860. The South had gone past mere words in the slavery debate; a Southern Senator had beaten a Northern Senator on the Senate floor hard enough to cause permanent spinal damage for making a speech critical of slavery; he was then hailed as a hero throughout the South. A pro-slavery mob has crossed from Missouri into the Kansas Territory to murder the man who may or may not have been the Governor of Kansas for being an Abolitionist. And John Brown has been hanged despite a near-total lack of evidence that he was inciting or trying to incite a slave revolt. That's a dead Governor, a crippled Senator, and a public figure, however ill-mannered, executed for no reason. The North in 1860 perceives the South as a pack of lawless, murderous thugs and wants them PUNISHED. And they have the numbers to guarantee it.

No candidate with a conciliatory stance towards the South can win unless you remove a few of those events. And the South percieves the North as a bunch of whining cowards, so it's hard to see how you prevent these events, or others very like them.
 
By 1860 the Congress had almost broken down , the election of 108 pro Abolitionist Republicans in 1861 wouldn't help.
 
Well, the idea is that the numbers do support a Douglas/Bell victory, and perhaps this would somewhat soften the numbers gained by other parties (more congressmen running as Constitutional Unionists). I KNOW this does nothing to fix the dislike the South and the North have for each other, but I think that this is the last dance of the moderates before the country gets completely ripped apart. This outcome is going to anger many on both sides as well, but perhaps not to the point of secession. If you add Bell and Douglas' votes, they are the clear winner.

Yes, the idea is to prolong the USA falling apart. I don't doubt that it would--at 1864 at the latest. Kansas is going to remain a festering sore--perhaps the first move of the New Government is to try to restore order. Meanwhile, perhaps South Carolina will move to secede, despite having a moderate government in power. I think they will give it some time to see what the presidency means.

No matter what happens, I strongly suspect that Douglas/Bell will fail to fix the problems at the root of the Civil War (Slavery Expansion, Fugitive Slave Bill, and Kansas), and that in the best case, a President Lincoln is elected in 1864--with an immediate secession of South Carolina.

As for the Senate falling apart, this could entail a move towards authoritarianism--The Senate might well wind up banishing the radical senators on both sides and have an awkward minority government. This could end in a dual secession, north and south, as well.

The other interesting situation is that Douglas/Bell might split the secession movement. But its still a hard road in any case.

I expect that the 16th President of the United States will not enjoy popular support or be able to accomplish much. Further abuses are likely to continue.
 
The Democratic Party was so deeply divided that I doubt a Bell-Douglas ticket could occur. Besides, Bell had left the Democrats to join the Whigs over 20 years before. And since he'd been one of only two southern senators to vote against the Kansas-Nebraska act and he opposed the pro-slavery Lecompton Constitution for Kansas, so I doubt the deep south would have liked him very much.

If it does, there's a reasonable chance that northern Democrats, upset at the party caving in to southern interests, split and nominate their own candidate and/or join the Republicans. Meanwhile, southern fire-eaters, outraged that Douglas is even on the ticket, and far from pleased with Bell, walk and nominate their own candidate.

Of course, even if this fusion ticket gets every vote that went to Bell, Beckinridge, and Douglas in OTL, Lincoln still handily wins the elctoral vote and is elected President.
 
Well, that whole trading deal might well work differently.

The "Northern Democrat" that replaces Douglas might cut heavily into Lincoln's electorate, perhaps by positioning themselves next to Lincoln on the political spectrum.

Fiver, you're scenario actually provides a new option of how this could work:

Candidates:
Lincoln (Rep)
Northern Democrat (Dem)
Douglas-Bell (Union)
Breckinridge (Dem).

If said "Northern Democrat" leans closer to Lincoln, then he splits the vote and, once again, Douglas-Bell wins. For now, this is the situation I suggest, where the Northern Democrats are still tapped by the Douglass and get more votes.

This is still electioneering for victory. If no one gets a electoral majority, the lowest electoral votes get to choose the winner: If its Breckinridge, they have no choice but Bell. The Northern Democrat might also plausibly choose Bell as well. So, Douglas Bell is the winner, but they don't win a majority vote and the Northern Democrat and Lincoln split the vote. No Mandate and perhaps a crisis from the very beginning.

But I can see it happening...
 
Lincoln already split the northern vote with the northern Democratic candidate in OTL and got clear majorities everywhere but in California. Another northern Democrat candidate will just cut into the Bell-Douglas ticket, not hurt Lincoln. Nothing in this Whig-Democrat fusion ticket shows it would appeal to anyone who voted for Lincoln in OTL and unless you can provide reasons why it would, the Bell-Davis ticket has no credible chance of winning.

Not that the Bell-Douglas ticket has any real chance of forming. The Constitutional Union party was formed by people unhappy with the Republican and both Demcratic Parties candidates and platforms. Douglas was the champion of the northern Democrats and abandoning that party to join the other is unlikely to help him. People who voted Breckinridge in OTL will want nothing to do with the ticket.

The Bell-Douglas ticket might pull more votes than the Bell ticket did in OTL. If it's successful beyond all hope, it will get all votes that went to both men in OTL.

That means they at best win California, Kentucky, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennesse, and Virginia. That will give them 55 electoral votes, putting them in third place behind Breckinridge with 72 and Lincoln with 176. Lincoln still handily wins the election.
 
Top