Title: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: HarrisonL on May 08, 2019, 10:22:39 AM ()
What do y'all think of this solely Lincoln vs Douglas matchup? Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on May 08, 2019, 10:41:34 AM Indiana and Pennsylvania would almost certainly vote for Douglas before Ohio (which even Frémont won in '56), and I tend to think New York would go Democratic as well in a scenario where Douglas has a national majority. Of course, the greater difficulty is for Douglas to win back the Southern fire eaters who backed Breckinridge IOTL without simultaneously alienating the Old Northwest. I tend to think a Democratic victory was impossible by 1860 short of adjudication by the House; the country was too deeply divided to elect a national candidate, and the mathematics of the electoral college meant the North would outvote the South in a sectional contest.
Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS on May 08, 2019, 03:33:54 PM Lincoln still wins by an extremely narrow Electoral College margin (only losing his 4 Electoral votes in New Jersey, and all electoral votes from California and Oregon compared to his real life performance), all while he loses the National Popular Vote by slightly more than 20%.
Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on May 08, 2019, 03:35:14 PM Even if the entire over 60% of voters who didn't vote for Lincoln all vote for the same candidate, Lincoln still wins.
Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Cold War Liberal on May 09, 2019, 11:11:49 AM Lincoln still wins by an extremely narrow Electoral College margin (only losing his 4 Electoral votes in New Jersey, and all electoral votes from California and Oregon compared to his real life performance), all while he loses the National Popular Vote by slightly more than 20%. Even if the entire over 60% of voters who didn't vote for Lincoln all vote for the same candidate, Lincoln still wins. That's insane. What a polarized election. Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: LoneStarDem on May 09, 2019, 12:13:22 PM Lincoln still wins baby.
Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: morgankingsley on May 09, 2019, 01:30:17 PM Lincoln still wins by an extremely narrow Electoral College margin (only losing his 4 Electoral votes in New Jersey, and all electoral votes from California and Oregon compared to his real life performance), all while he loses the National Popular Vote by slightly more than 20%. Even if the entire over 60% of voters who didn't vote for Lincoln all vote for the same candidate, Lincoln still wins. That's insane. What a polarized election. Yeah in this timeline where such a thing happens, people don't get to bitch about trump losing by 2.1 percent since that would be nothing in comparison Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: S019 on May 09, 2019, 01:34:44 PM () What do y'all think of this solely Lincoln vs Douglas matchup? I say IN votes Democrat and OH votes Republican Also what happened in SC Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on May 09, 2019, 01:37:55 PM Also what happened in SC Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS on May 09, 2019, 02:09:48 PM Lincoln still wins by an extremely narrow Electoral College margin (only losing his 4 Electoral votes in New Jersey, and all electoral votes from California and Oregon compared to his real life performance), all while he loses the National Popular Vote by slightly more than 20%. Even if the entire over 60% of voters who didn't vote for Lincoln all vote for the same candidate, Lincoln still wins. That's insane. What a polarized election. Yeah in this timeline where such a thing happens, people don't get to bitch about trump losing by 2.1 percent since that would be nothing in comparison Well, a major factor in Lincoln not winning the popular vote in such a case is that he was not on the ballot in 10 states for completely arbitrary reasons, and slaves were barred from voting in any event. He could have won the popular vote if he was on the ballot in every state (including South Carolina actually having a direct popular vote and not picking electors in the state legislature) and if slaves were allowed to vote. Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Stranger in a strange land on May 09, 2019, 03:20:13 PM Lincoln still wins by an extremely narrow Electoral College margin (only losing his 4 Electoral votes in New Jersey, and all electoral votes from California and Oregon compared to his real life performance), all while he loses the National Popular Vote by slightly more than 20%. Even if the entire over 60% of voters who didn't vote for Lincoln all vote for the same candidate, Lincoln still wins. That's insane. What a polarized election. Yeah in this timeline where such a thing happens, people don't get to bitch about trump losing by 2.1 percent since that would be nothing in comparison Well, a major factor in Lincoln not winning the popular vote in such a case is that he was not on the ballot in 10 states for completely arbitrary reasons, and slaves were barred from voting in any event. He could have won the popular vote if he was on the ballot in every state (including South Carolina actually having a direct popular vote and not picking electors in the state legislature) and if slaves were allowed to vote. Wasn't the reason that Lincoln wasn't on the ballot in those states because no men could be found to serve as electors for him? Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS on May 09, 2019, 03:57:52 PM Lincoln still wins by an extremely narrow Electoral College margin (only losing his 4 Electoral votes in New Jersey, and all electoral votes from California and Oregon compared to his real life performance), all while he loses the National Popular Vote by slightly more than 20%. Even if the entire over 60% of voters who didn't vote for Lincoln all vote for the same candidate, Lincoln still wins. That's insane. What a polarized election. Yeah in this timeline where such a thing happens, people don't get to bitch about trump losing by 2.1 percent since that would be nothing in comparison Well, a major factor in Lincoln not winning the popular vote in such a case is that he was not on the ballot in 10 states for completely arbitrary reasons, and slaves were barred from voting in any event. He could have won the popular vote if he was on the ballot in every state (including South Carolina actually having a direct popular vote and not picking electors in the state legislature) and if slaves were allowed to vote. Wasn't the reason that Lincoln wasn't on the ballot in those states because no men could be found to serve as electors for him? Yes, and I think the reason why that happened was recursively because many people would have had to be in fear of a potentially violent response. Also, if slaves could vote, then it would have been much easier for Lincoln to be on the ballot since it would be a very easy source of electors for him. He also probably would have won South Carolina and Mississippi outright since slaves were then a clear majority of those states populations. Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Spark on May 11, 2019, 09:48:16 PM Lincoln still prevails with 157 EVs with Douglas winning OH and losing IL.
Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: S019 on May 12, 2019, 11:58:34 AM What do people think would have happened of Bell was the sole candidate? Also how badly would Breckinridge lose in a two way race?
Also, why did Lincoln win majorities in Northern states IRL, that it would have been unlikely to obtain in a two way race. Also, to be honest, the 60-40 PV is not even the worst that it can get, as Lincoln won large majorities in New England, it would be interesting if someone can see just how large the PV-EV disparity can be Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: S019 on May 12, 2019, 12:05:26 PM What do people think would have happened of Bell was the sole candidate? Also how badly would Breckinridge lose in a two way race? Also, why did Lincoln win majorities in Northern states IRL, that it would have been unlikely to obtain in a two way race. Also, to be honest, the 60-40 PV is not even the worst that it can get, as Lincoln won large majorities in New England, it would be interesting if someone can see just how large the PV-EV disparity can be I think that the Democratic split and candidates attacking each other, drove moderate Northerners into the arms of Lincoln (with the exception of NY and NJ moderates), without a split, I think that, the candidates would not have been attacked as much Just Bell: () Just Breckinridge: () Just Douglas: () Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on May 13, 2019, 06:14:25 PM Lincoln still prevails with 157 EVs with Douglas winning OH and losing IL. These are . . . very bad. In particular, Bell as the anti-Republican unity candidate makes no sense at all in the context of 1860. Even if Bell somehow convinces the South to back his candidacy, why would Northern Democrats support a Southern Whig? I'd expect Lincoln to do better in the North in a one-on-one race against Bell, who would be unlikely to receive the support of immigrants or wage laborers who backed the Democratic ticket IOTL. Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on May 13, 2019, 06:23:34 PM Also, why did Lincoln win majorities in Northern states IRL, that it would have been unlikely to obtain in a two way race. Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: morgankingsley on May 15, 2019, 04:11:20 AM I always have been curious on how much the historical perception would be on Douglas on the event that he somehow won. It would be very interesting to see a timeline of that.
Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on May 16, 2019, 02:56:44 PM I always have been curious on how much the historical perception would be on Douglas on the event that he somehow won. It would be very interesting to see a timeline of that. Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: S019 on May 16, 2019, 03:05:48 PM I always have been curious on how much the historical perception would be on Douglas on the event that he somehow won. It would be very interesting to see a timeline of that. Lane is beyond terrible, but Johnson was one of the more moderate southern Democrats (note lower case "s"), he would basically be James Buchanan, all over again, which is bad, but not anywhere, near as bad as Lane. Still puzzles me how Lane got elected in Oregon and Confederate sympathizers got elected in California Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Unconditional Surrender Truman on May 17, 2019, 05:40:06 PM I always have been curious on how much the historical perception would be on Douglas on the event that he somehow won. It would be very interesting to see a timeline of that. Lane is beyond terrible, but Johnson was one of the more moderate southern Democrats (note lower case "s"), he would basically be James Buchanan, all over again, which is bad, but not anywhere, near as bad as Lane. Still puzzles me how Lane got elected in Oregon and Confederate sympathizers got elected in California As for Oregon and California, the settlers who emigrated there after the Mexican War were hardly Yankee Puritans, and both states leaned Democratic throughout the 1850s in spite of being nominally "free" states. Much like Indiana and Illinois, California outlawed slavery because whites there feared the competition from unpaid slave labor: otherwise, the state remained hostile to blacks and generally Southern in its sympathies. Only the diligent efforts of pro-Union citizens in the months leading up to Fort Sumter prevented secessionists from taking California out of the Union, either as an independent republic or a Confederate state. Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: brucejoel99 on May 18, 2019, 02:39:08 AM Yeah, even if you combined ALL of the non-Lincoln votes together into one hypothetical candidate, Lincoln STILL would've won despite winning less than 40% of the popular vote against a "candidate" that would've won over 60%. That kinda blows your mind but it's mathematically true... Lincoln basically campaigned in only half of the country, & his vote totals showed that. It was the electoral college that saved him in the end, & even a unified Democratic ticket probably wouldn't have been able to defeat him.
Title: Re: 1860: South unites behind Douglas Post by: Spark on May 25, 2019, 08:33:39 PM ()
Abraham Lincoln - 172 EVs, 43% Stephen A Douglas - 131 EVs, 35% |